Skip to main content

Full text of "Iranians and Greeks in South Russia (Ancient History and Archaeology)"

See other formats








I i 





Oxford University Press 

London Edinburgh Glasgow Copenhagen 

Nets York Toronto Melbourne Cape T&tm 

Bombay Calcutta Madras Shanghai 

Humphrey Milford Publisher to the University 


THIS book is not intended to compete with the valuable and 
learned book of Ellis H. Minns on the same subject. Our aims 
are different. Minns endeavoured to give a complete survey of 
the material illustrating the early history of South Russia and of the 
views expressed by both Russian and non- Russian scholars on the 
many and various questions suggested by the study of that material. 
I do not mean that Minns' book is a mere compendium. In 
dealing with the various problems of the history and archaeology of 
South Russia Minns went his own way ; his criticism is acute, his 
views independent. Nevertheless his main object was to give a survey 
as full and as complete as possible. And his attempt was success- 
ful. Minns* book will remain for decades the chief source of informa- 
tion about South Russia both for Russian and for non- Russian 

My own aim is different. In my short exposition I have tried to 
give a history of the South Russian lands in the prehistoric, the proto- 
historic, and the classic periods down to the epoch of the migrations. 
By history I mean not a repetition of the scanty evidence preserved 
by the classical writers and illustrated by the archaeological material 
but an attempt to define the part played by South Russia in the 
history of the world in general, and to emphasize the contributions 
of South Russia to the civilization of mankind. 

In doing so I was obliged to use every kind of material, especially 
the rich archaeological evidence furnished by the South Russian 
excavations. Notwithstanding this dominant use of archaeological 
material, my book is not a handbook of South Russian archaeology, 
nor is it an investigation of one section in the history of Oriental and 
classical art. I have tried to write history, using the archaeological 


evidence in the same way as I should use, and have used, in this book 
written documents or literary sources. Such an attempt is not new. 
Many eminent scholars have employed this method in attempting to 
write the history of the ancient Orient in general and of its different 
parts. The same method should be used more widely in historical 
surveys of the Roman provinces, as of course it has been used for 
the history of Gaul by Camille Jullian, for the history of Africa by 
Stephane Gsell, for the history of Britain by the late Francis Haver- 
field, for the history of Belgium by Franz Cumont, and for the history 
of Germany by many writers, and especially by H. DragendorfL 
But I should like to call for a more rational use of archaeological 
material than has been usual hitherto. For me archaeology is not 
a source of illustrations for written texts, but an independent source 
of historical information, no less valuable and important, sometimes 
more important, than the written sources. We must learn and we are 
gradually learning how to write history with the help of archaeology. 

South Russia, with its enormous wealth of archaeological material, 
presents a favourable opportunity for such an experiment. The 
results of my historical investigations are of course far from final or 
complete. We know but little of the history and archaeology of 
Central Asia and of the Iranian world. The scientific exploration of 
the Caucasian lands and of the upper course of the Euphrates is still 
in its infancy. The mystery of the early history of Asia Minor, and 
especially of its north-eastern part, has just begun to dispel. And 
it is precisely these lands which provide the key to the leading 
phenomena of the early history of South Russia. If I have succeeded 
in showing the importance of these connexions for the development 
of South Russia, and the importance of South Russia for under- 
standing the main features of the civilization of these lands both in 
the early and in the later period, during the rule of the Scythians 
and that of the Sarmatians in the South Russian steppes, I shall 
consider the main part of my task accomplished. I do not deny the 
importance of the Greek influences in South Russia, but at the same 
time I do not regard South Russia as one of the provinces of the 


Greek world. South Russia has always been, and remained even in 
the Greek period, an Oriental land. Greek influence in South Russia 
was strong, it is true, but the current of Hellenism met another 
current there, an Oriental one, and it was this which finally carried 
the day, and in the period of the migrations spread all over Western 
Europe. The attempt to hellenize the South Russian steppes was 
not a complete success ; much more successful was the attempt to 
orientalize the semi -Greek world of the northern shores of the Black 
Sea. In the civilization which the Sarmatians, the Goths, the Huns 
brought with them to Western Europe it is the Orient which plays 
the leading part ; the Greek, the Western, and the Northern elements 
are of but secondary importance. Such is the leading idea of my book. 
My book was written not in Russia but in England and in France* 
The proofs were corrected in America. In writing it I was unable 
to recur constantly to the original sources preserved in the Russian 
museums, as I should if I had been in Russia. Nor was I able to 
consult friends and colleagues, still in Russia, on many questions 
which they would have helped me to elucidate. Unfortunately 
Russia is closed to mc for a long time to come. This explains why 
I have been obliged to quote from memory many books and articles 
which formed part of my private library in Petrograd. It also explains 
the choice of illustrations. Most of them are reproduced from photo- 
graphs which I brought with me from Russia. But some of them 
I was obliged to take from photographs and drawings already pub- 
lished in printed books. I am very much obliged to the Cambridge 
University Press and to Dr. Ellis H. Minns for permission to use 
some of the drawings, and one of the maps, from the work of Minns. 
But, generally speaking, in the choice of my illustrations I have tried 
to avoid reproducing well-know-n objects, especially if they have been 
published by Minns, and to figure, for the most part, such monuments 
as are either unpublished or published in an unsatisfactory way. 
For permission to reproduce unpublished objects my warmest thanks 
are due to Dr. D. G. Hogarth, Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, 

to Sir Hercules Read and Mr. G. F. Hill, Keepers of the British 



Museum, to Mr. Edmond Pettier, Keeper of die Louvre, to Mr. 
Ernest Babelon, Director of the Cabinet des MedaiLes at Paris, 
to Mr. Edward Robinson, Director of the Metropolitan Museum, 
and to Mrs. E. Meyer, of New York. 

The text of my book was written partly in French, partly in 
English, For the translation of the French part and for a thorough 
revision of the English I am indebted to the self-sacrificing kindness 
of Mr, J. D. Beazley. I cannot find adequate words to express my 
warm thanks to that accomplished scholar for his help. He assisted 
me also in reading the proofs and in arranging and composing the 
illustrations. I also owe a great debt of gratitude to Dr. Ellis H. Minns, 
who read the proofs of my book. 

But for the scientific spirit of the staff of the Clarendon Press 
my book could never have been published in such beautiful form 
and with so many illustrations. 

The index was compiled by my wife, Mrs. S. RostovtzefT. 

I dedicate my book to some living and many dead friends. To 
these men I am indebted for what I know about the history of South 

Madison (Wis.), ILSA. 
November 1921. 






TURIES B.C.) 35 








STYLE ,8, 



BIBLIOGRAPHY ........ 223 

INDEX . 239 



I. Clay figurines of Scythians from Cappadocia, 4th to 3rd cent. B.C. 

i, 2, 4. Ashmolean Museum. 3. Louvre, 
II. Bronze pole-tops from Cappadocia. British Museum and Louvre. 

III. Two engraved silver vases from Maikop. Third millennium b.c. 

Hermitage, Petrograd. 

IV. 1. Gold diadem. 2-4. Massive gold and silver figures of bulls. 

5-7. Gold plaques sewn on cloth. From Maikop. Third 
millennium B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
V. 1, 2, 4. Axe, arrow-heads, belt-clasp (all bronze) from a Taman 
grave. 7th cent, bx. Hermitage, Petrograd. 3. Bronze pole- 
top from Cappadocia. British Museum, 5. Bronze statuette 
of a horseman from the Kuban. Hermitage, Petrograd. 

VI. Engraved and gilt silver mirror. From Kelermes, Kuban. 6th 

cent, b,c. Hermitage, Petrograd, 
VII. Two gold cups from Kelermes, Kuban. 6th cent. B.C. Hermitage, 
VIII. i, 2. Iron axe and iron sword with wooden scabbard, all covered 
with gold. From Kelermes, Kuban. Hermitage, Petrograd, 
3. Iron dagger and scabbard, covered with gold. Shumeyko'a 
Farm, near Rom ny. Kiev, Archaeological Museum. 6th cent. B.C, 

IX, 1. Gold pectoral of a scale-corslet. 6th cent. B.C. From 
Kclermcs, Kuban. Hermitage, Petrograd. 2. Gold ornaments 
inlaid with amber. 6th cent. B.C. From Kelermes, Kuban, 
Hermitage, Petrograd, 
X, Bronze pole-tops and a bronze bell. From the Kuban, 6th to 
5th cent. B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 

XL A. Bronze ceremonial axe from Bactria. B, Bronze ceremonial 
axe from Hamadan, Persia. C. Bronze axe from Van, Armenia. 
D, E. Two bronze axes from Persia, British Museum. 



XII. Silver and gold rhyta from the * Seven Brothers * on the Kuban, 
5th cent, B,c, Hermitage, Petrograd. 

XIII. Gold ornaments of wooden rhyta from the * Seven Brothers ' on the 

Kuban. 5th cent. B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 

XIV. Greek bronze breastplate. From Eliza vetinskaya on the Kuban. 

4th cent, b,c. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
XV. 1. Gold bracelet. 2. Silver bracelet. 3. Silver kylix with engraved 
and gilt emblema. 1 and 3 from the c Seven Brothers ' on the 
Kuban, 2 from the Taman peninsula. 5th to 4th cent. B.C. 
Hermitage, Petrograd. 
XVI. 1. Engraved chalcedony scaraboid, Persian. 2, 3. Gold and gold- 
plated earrings, 4. Gold necklace. From Nymphaeum, Crimea. 
5th cent. B.C. Ashmolean Museum. 
XVI L 1. Painted clay vase from, the Taman peninsula. 2* Gold necklace 
from Chersonesus. Late 5th or early 4th cent. B.C. Hermitage, 
XVIII. 1 . Earrings from Theodosia, Crimea. Hermitage, Petrograd. 2-4. 
Gold garment plaques from Chersonesus, Crimea, Hermitage, 
Petrograd. 5. Gold coins of Panticapaeum. British Museum 
and Louvre. 4th cent. B.C. 
XIX. Gold comb from the ' Solokha * tumulus. 4th cent. B.C. Hermitage, 
XX. Silver cup and gold patera from the ' Solokha ' tumulus. 4th 

cent. b.c. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
XXL 1. ' Gorytos * (bow and arrows case) covered with silver, from the 
* Solokha * tumulus. 4th cent. B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
2, 3. Silver amphorae from the * Chertomlyk ' tumulus (lower 
Dnieper). 3rd cent. B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
XXII. Electrum vase from the * Kul-Oba ' tumulus, near Kerch. 4th to 

3rd cent. B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
XXIII. t- Gold plaque of the tiara from the * Karagodeuashkh ' tumulus on 
the Kuban, 2. Fragments of the rhyton of Merdjany in the 
Kuban region, 3. Gold clasp of a belt or diadem from the 
' Kul-Oba ' tumulus, near Kerch. 4-6. Gold plaques sewn 
on garments, from various tumuli on the lower Dnieper, 
to 3rd cent. B.C. Hermitage, Petrograd. 






4. Silver paterae, gold tore, and gold-plated scabbard. From 
Prokhorovka, Orenburg. Orenburg Museum. 5. Gold-plated 
scabbard. From the tumulus Buerova Mogila (Taman penin- 
sula). Hermitage, Petrograd. 3rd cent. B.C. 

XXV. 1. Silver-gilt belt with inset stones. From Maikop. 2nd cent. b.c.(?). 
Hermitage, Petrograd. 2. Gold plaque with inset stones. 
From Western Siberia. 1st cent. a.d. Hermitage, Petrograd. 

XXVI. 1. Crown. 2. Perfume bottle, 3. Perfume bottle. 4, 5, Cup and 
statuette of Eros, The treasure of Novocherkassk (all gold). 
1st cent, b.c- to 1st cent. a.d. Hermitage, Petrograd. 
XXVtI. 1, 2. Silver-gilt phalarae from the shores of the Black Sea. Cabinet 
des Medailles, Paris. 3. Silver plaque from Raermond (Hol- 
land). Rijks Museum, Leyden. 4. Silver-gilt plaque from the 
Siverskaya Stanitsa, Taman peninsula. Historical Museum, 
Moscow. 2nd cent. B.C. 
XXVIII. Wall paintings in two graves at Kerch. The first now destroyed, 
1st to 2nd cent. a.d. 

XXIX. Wall paintings in a grave at Kerch. 1st to 2nd cent, a.d. 
XXX. 1, Clay statuette of a Panticapaean soldier. 1st cent. B.C. Hermi- 
Lage, Petrograd. 2. Grave stela from Kerch, 1st cent. aj>. 
Kerch, Royal Tumulus. 3* Copper coins of the Bosphoran 
kingdom. 1st to 2nd cent. a,d. Hermitage, Petrograd. 

XXXI. 1. Chinese bronze vase of the Chu dynasty. First millennium B.C. 
Collection of Mrs. E. Meyer, New York (copyright Mrs- E. 
Meyer, New York). 2, 3. Two bronze plaques from a Chinese 
grave of the Han dynasty. Metropolitan Museum, New York. 
XXX II . Wooden ornaments of the furniture of the Oseberg ship from Norway . 
Museum, Christians. 

Sketch-map of South Russia. 










l 5- 





Plan of the Maikop burial ....... 

Engravings on the Maikop vase 

The tumulus of Kostromskaya. Section. Plan 

The Ulski barrow. Plan. Perspective Sketch . 

The burial in the barrow of Eltzavetinskaya . 

Horse trappings from the Southern Caucasus and the region of the 

Kuban ....... 

Plan of a grave-chamber in Anapa . 

Two stone chambers in the tumuli of Yuz-Oba, near Panticapaeum 

Clay vases of indigenous fabrication from the Middle Dnieper 

7th to 4th cent. B.C. ..... 

Section and plan of a grave on the Middle Dnieper 
Plan of the Solokha barrow .... 

The Central grave, Solokha. Plan. Section on line 

The Side grave, Solokha 

Barrow in the Orenburg region. Plan. Section 
Sarmatian grave in the Kuban region. Plan. Section 
Glass vases, brooches, &c., from the Kuban barrows 
Sarmatian garment plaques of gold . 
Sarmatian bottles ...... 

Brooches of the Sarmatian graves 

The phalara from Starobelsk .... 

Horse trappings. Animal style. 6th to 3rd cent. b.c 
Horse trappings. Animal style. 5th to 4th cent, B.c 
Horse trappings from North Russia. . 












J 3 2 




THE early history of South Russia has never been treated in a 
purely historical way. South Russia has never been studied as an 
integral portion of the ancient world, and as one which took a 
share t sometimes a very important share, in the general development 
of Oriental and Greco-Roman civilization. Archaeologists, attracted 
by the astonishing wealth of the Greek, Scythian, and Sarmatian finds 
in South Russia, have been content to classify and to date the objects 
without utilizing them for the purpose of history : historians and 
epigraphists have applied themselves to tracing the history of the 
Greek colonies in Russia, and have not attempted to understand it 
as part of a more general history — that of South Russia as a whole, 
and that of the entire Oriental and classical w T orld. Proof of this will 
be furnished by a short survey of archaeological discovery in Russia, 
and of the literature w r hich it has called forth. 

The first persons to interest themselves in the national antiquities 
of Russia, and the first who tried to comprehend their historical and 
artistic value, were for the most part French emigrants who found a 
welcome and a home in Russia after the French Revolution. These 
emigrants exercised considerable influence on Russian intellectual life 
at the beginning of the nineteenth century, and in particular, they did 
much to awaken in official and intellectual circles a lively interest in 
the. numerous relics of classical antiquity, which were being unearthed 
in South Russia, and especially at Kerch, the ancient Panticapaeum. 
It would take too long to enumerate all the Frenchmen who worked 
side by side with the Russians at this task : a few names must suffice. 
I shall mention the Due de Richelieu, whose stay at Odessa was of 
great importance for the intellectual life of South Russia in general, 
and whose enlightened influence strengthened the interest in national 
antiquities which was growing up in the great commercial city ; the 
Comte de Langeron, governor of New Russia at the beginning of the 
nineteenth century ; Cousinery, French consul at Odessa, who formed 
the first large collection of the coins of the Greek colonies in South 
Russia. These were official personages ; still more was accomplished 
by educated and devoted workers who consecrated their lives to the 

»35J b 


discovery and study of classical antiquities in South Russia. I shall 
cite only two names. Paul Dubrux, a French emigrant, Chevalier of 
St. Louis, found refuge at Kerch from the storm of the Revolution, 
He did not enjoy the brilliant official career which was vouchsafed to 
some of his compatriots : a modest chinovnik, quiet and honest, he 
lived and died poor. His classical knowledge— slender enough— his 
energv»and his material resources, he devoted to the study of classic 
soil in the peninsula of Kerch, and to archaeological investigation in 
that still unexplored country. Every scholar knows what part he 
played in the discovery, accidental it is true, of the splendid tumulus 
of Kul-Oha, His report of the excavation is far superior, both in 
truthfulness and in precision, to all the others, and the value of it can 
hardly be exaggerated, since the find still remains one of the richest 
and most important of its class. It is less generally known that it was 
Dubrux, more than any one else, who laid the foundation of the 
historical topography of Kerch and the Kerch peninsula : it was his 
minute researches and his sometimes heroic excavations, earned on 
without money in a waterless and foodless desert, which formed a 
basis for the subsequent endeavours of Blaramberg, Dubois de Mont- 
pereux, and Ashik to identify extant ruins with the localities mentioned 
by ancient geographers. It is a regrettable fact that in historical 
topography we have made little advance since Dubrux. The work 
of Blaramberg, another emigrant, was less valuable than that of 
Dubrux, But Blaramberg was a man of great energy and wide vision : 
we are indebted to him for some interesting publications, and above all 
for the foundation of the two most important museums in South 
Russia— those of Odessa and Kerch. 

I must also mention the great services rendered to classical 
archaeology in Russia by other French scholars, Dubois de Mont- 
pereux, by his great work Voyage autour du Caucase, Sabatier, and 
Raoul Rochette, helped to draw the attention of the learned world to 
the discoveries in South Russia. Dubois de Montpereux, an eminent 
geologist, has left us a lively and faithful picture, from the archaeo- 
logical point of view, of the Crimea and the Caucasus in the middle 
of the last century. m t , 

Thanks to the constant interest of the imperial family, and or 
aristocratic and official circles, archaeological research in South Russia 
soon became regular if not systematic. From the beginning of the 
nineteenth century there was always an official agent at Kerch to 
collect antiquities and to make scientific excavations. With the 
foundation of an Imperial Archaeological Commission in 1859, the 
organization was considerably enlarged : year by year the members of 


the commission excavated the numerous barrows and cemeteries 
scattered over the vast steppes on the shores of the Black Sea, and on 
the banks of the great Russian rivers. The results obtained were of 
the highest importance. Those who were able to visit the Museum 
of the Hermitage before the Russian Revolution will remember the 
deep impression produced upon all visitors, whether specialists or not. 
by the two great rooms on the first floor-the Kerch Room and the 
Nikopol Room. The ordinary sightseer was struck by the accumula- 
tion or gold objects in these rooms, by the enormous quantity of jewels, 
of gold and silver plate, of engraved gems. The less unsophisticated 
were astonished to find so many masterpieces of Hellenic art, sometimes 
of tyros unknown in other museums. But the scholar, above all 
carried away quite novel impressions : realizing that in these rooms 
he was in the presence of a new world, in which Greek art appeared 
in an altered, sometimes almost unrecognizable form, and in which 
side by side with this art, another art was revealed, new and strange. 
I he thousands of objects which filled the Hermitage came almost 
entirely from excavations conducted by the Archaeological Commis- 
sion. Year after year the treasures poured in. Each excavation, 
prosecuted with knowledge and perseverance, afforded new series of 
objects, no less artistically interesting and no less scientifically valuable 
than the old. The cemeteries of the great Greek colonies, Panti- 
capaeum, Phanagona, Chersonesus, OlBia, and the ruins of these 
towns— two of which were excavated systematically, Olbia by Farma- 
kovski, Chersonesus by Kosciuszko- Waluzinicz and Loeper— Furnished 
immense numbers of pure Greek products, imported from Asia 
Minor, from Athens, and from other Hellenic centres. The finest 
groups of Ionian vases came from Olbia and Berezan, which were 
methodically excavated by Ernst von Stern, from Panticapaeum, and 
from the Taman peninsula : black-figured and red-figured ware, the 
Panathenaic vases, Hellenistic and Roman pottery, are represented in 
the Hermitage by superb series. The Greek jewellery , as we shall see, 
is unequalled ; most of it came from those great stone chambers, 
surmounted by stately tumuli, at Kerch, at Theodosia, at Anapa, and 
in the peninsula of Taman, which were the tombs of the kings who 
ruled the Bosphorus and the tribes dwelling in the Taman peninsula. 
The fineness of this jewellery enables us to appreciate the creative 
genius of the Greek goldsmith in the fifth and tourth centuries B. c. 
The wooden coffins, sometimes painted, are frequently masterpieces. 
The gold and silver vases are various and beautiful. It would be a 
long task to enumerate all the classes of Greek objects yielded by the 
ruins and cemeteries of the Greek cities. 


Simultaneously, another group of discoveries was being made in 
the great barrows on the Russian steppes, in the basins of the Kuban, 
the Don, the Dnieper, and the Dniester. I cannot mention them all. 
In the first period of exploration, up to i 880 , the following were the 
most important, the order being geographical : the barrows of 
Chertomlyk and Alexandropol on the lower Dnieper, excavated by 
Zabelin in 1859-63, monumental tombs of Scythian kings, belong- 
ing to the fourth or third century B. c. : the series of kurgans calico 
the Seven Brothers, on the Kuban, excavated by Tiesenhausen in 
1875 and subsequent years, royal tombs of the firth and fourth cen- 
turies b. c. ; several barrows of native princes near the Greek colony 
of Nymphaeum in the Crimea, belonging to the fifth and fourth 
centuries B.C., excavated by different persons from 1867 onwards 
(a part of the finds is now in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford) ; 
some enormous kurgans in the Taman peninsula, especially the 
so-called Bolshaya and Malaya Bliznitsa (Big and Little Twins) and 
those on the Vasyiirinskaya Gora, explored by Tiesenhausen , Zaoelin, 
and Lutsenko in 1864-8, and belonging to the fourth and third 
centuries B. c. ; the group of graves near Phanagoria (Artyukh6v*s 
farm), of the third or second century B.C., excavated in 1879 and 1880 ; 
the Greco-indigenous cemetery of the ancient Gorgippia, now Anapa, 
explored at various times, especially in 1879-80, by different persons ; 
finally, the great treasure of Novocherkassk on the Don, which yielded 
a rich series of gold objects belonging, as I believe, to the first century 
B.C. or a.d. 

Nicolas Veselovski began his systematic excavations about 1880. 
He was a man of boundless vigour and of singular tenacity, and his 
good fortune never deserted him. The discoveries which we owe to 
him have not yet been properly appreciated : it is to be hoped that 
their scientific importance will soon be realized. We are not concerned 
here with his researches in Turkestan : his other discoveries concern 
us very nearly. His methodical exploration of the Kuban valley 
brought to light a number of tumulary graves which belong to the 
copper age and may be dated in the third millennium B.C.; of these 
I shall speak in my next chapter : also a series of barrows belonging 
to a widely different period, from the first century B, C. to the third 
century A, d., which enable us for the first time to form an idea of the 
Sarmatians and their civilization. At the same time, and in the same 
region, he discovered groups of graves dating from the sixth to the 
fourth centuries B. C. t which furnish an almost exact parallel to 
Herodotus* description of Scythian funeral customs : unfortunately, 
the richest of these finds, that of Kelermes, was not made by Vese- 


lovski but by an amateur. Side by side with his exploration of the 
Kuban valley, he continued the work of Zabelin in the region of the 
lower Dnieper and of the Don, as well as in the Crimea, and here also 
he achieved remarkable success. Most of the barrows which he 
excavated contained burials of the same period as Chertomtyk and 
Kul-Oba, that is to say, the fourth and third centuries B.C. The 
greatest prize was reserved for the end of his life : in 191 1 and 1912 
he presented us with the treasures of the Soldkha tumulus, which 
surpass everything found hitherto on the lower Dnieper or in the 

I lack space to mention the work done by other explorers, but I 
should like to speak for a moment about the scientific exploration of 
the middle Dnieper. Kiev was always a centre of intellectual life ; 
and here, especially in university circles, it was not long before a keen 
interest came to be taken in the national antiquities of the country. 
Systematic excavation began in the middle of the nineteenth century 
and has continued without interruption. Certain names should never 
be forgotten — Fundukley, AntonoVich, Tarndvski, Vdlkov, Belashevski, 
and above all, Chvojka and Count Bobrinskoy. Chvojka's momen- 
tous discoveries revealed, on the one hand, a palaeolithic settlement 
at Kiev, and, on the other, a great centre of neolithic and chalcolithic 
culture on the middle Dnieper, connected with the civilization of the 
Danube, and characterized oy painted pottery decorated with spirals 
and maeanders. Count Bobrinskoy gradually explored, in the region 
of Smela, the so-called Scythian culture, which begins in the eighth 
century B.C. and ends towards the Roman period. Both Chvojka 
and Bobrinskoy have also made us better acquainted with the civiliza- 
tions of the * urn fields * in the first and second centuries a.d. : these 
belong, in my opinion, probably to Germanic, possibly to Slavonic 

The discoveries of which I have spoken were accompanied by 
publications, often very handsome ones, of the monuments collected 
in the course of the excavations. The first great comprehensive 
publication, Les Antiguites du Bosphore Cimmfrien, was principally 
devoted to the products of Greek art : it was planned by a French 
scholar, Gille, who was keeper of one of the departments in the Hermi- 
tage at the middle of the nineteenth century. This work was followed, 
after a short interval, by another equally handsome publication, that 
of the Scythian antiquities discovered by Zabelin, Antiquitds de la 
Scythie d'Hetodote. Both books were remodelled, and combined with 
the Russian and Oriental antiquities of the Middle Ages, in the great 
work of Count Tolstoy and Professor Kondakov, Russian Antiquities. 


The three works are still classics ; moreover, they are well known 
outside Russia, thanks to the republication of the first and the trans- 
lation of the third by that distinguished scholar Mr. Salomon Rcinach, 
who, by these publications, and by a number of articles in the Revue 
archdohgiqtu, has helped to maintain the interest of Western scholars 
in the South Russian finds of the classical period. 

These works were concerned with the figurative monuments : the 
task of publishing the written monuments* the inscriptions, was under- 
taken and brilliantly accomplished by Vasili Latyshev in his well- 
known repertory, Inscripticnes antwuae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxim 
(vols, i, ii, and iy ; a second edition of the first in 191 2), which is a 
complete collection of the Greek and Latin inscriptions found in 
South Russia. The same author has compiled a repertory, almost 
exhaustive, of the passages in Greek and I^atin writers which refer 
to South Russia {Scytkka et Caucasica, vol. i, Auctores Graeci, vol. ii, 
Auctores Lattni). In addition to these publications the results of 
current excavation were given year by year in the periodical organs of 
the Archaeological Commission — its Reports (Otehety), its Materials 
(Materialy),and its Bulletin (Izvestiya) — and these were supplemented 
by the publication of the archaeological societies, especially the 
societies of St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Odessa, and of enlightened 
persons who were interested in Russian archaeology, for example, 
Khanenko's Antiquities of the Dnieper Region and Count Bobrinskoy's 

It would be difficult to say of other countries what can now be 
said of Russia, that almost all the treasures found in the country have 
been published, and most of them reproduced as well, and are at 
present accessible to any one who wifl consult the works of native 

A vast quantity of material has been collected and published. But 
that it has been studied and understood, that it has been utilized to 
reconstruct the story of South Russia at the dawn of history, 1 should 
hardly care to affirm. Apart from the French archaeologists whom I 
have already mentioned , the Germans were the first who paid attention 
to the antiquities of South Russia. Koehler, Koehne, Boeckh, Neu- 
mann, and Stephani made the earliest attempts to explain them 
scientifically : Stephani above all. He was Keeper of the Hermitage, 
a regular contributor to the Reports of the Archaeological Commission, 
and the author of the great AntiqtdUs du Bosphore Cimmirkn : year 
after year he compiled for the reports long and learned articles, 
in Russian and in German, on the antiquities of South Russia. 
Stephanies works are well known : his vast erudition, founded on 


the most extensive reading, makes them a perfect storehouse of 
information ; his judgement is sound when he is dealing with Greek 
objects ; and his interpretations of religious representations are 
sometimes very happy. But he was never able to understand monu- 
ments that were not purely Greek. Just as he refused to recognize 
Mycenaean culture, so his learning, limited to the Greek world, was 
incapable of detecting the Oriental and prehistoric elements in the 
antiquities of South Russia, and of appreciating the significance of 
those elements. 

Unfortunately he exercised a very powerful influence on succeeding 
generations. Vladimir Stasov and Nikodim Kondakov had divined 
the necessity of understanding the native civilization as such, but they 
did not succeed in putting their idea into practice, and the book of 
Tolstoy and Kondakov, which t have already mentioned, is a mere 
repertory, though a very useful one, of archaeological material. But 
Kondakov and Stasov stood almost alone. Much has been written 
about South Russia, but the writings are always dissertations on the 
Greek towns, commentaries on the fourth book of Herodotus, or 
studies of one or two isolated objects. Even the great work of Minns, 
an extremely useful and an extremely learned book, is but a repertory, 
although as a repertory almost faultless : what he gives us is a juxta- 
position of Scythians and Greeks, two separate parts, copiously 
illustrated, and no more. The same is true of Latyshev's erudite 
works, and of the recent articles by Ernst von Stern. The point of 
view is everywhere the same : that of the Hellenist in whose eyes the 
native world has only a relative value, by virtue of its influence upon 
Greek life in the Greek cities. 

My own point of view in all these questions of South Russian 
history is a different one. I take as my starting-point the unity of the 
region which we call South Russia ; the intersection of influences in 
that vast tract of country — Oriental and southern influences arriving 
by way of the Caucasus and the Black Sea, Greek influences spreading 
along the sea routes, and Western influences passing down the great 
Danubian route ; and the consequent formation, from time to time, 
of mixed civilizations, very curious and very interesting, influencing 
in their turn Central Russia on the one hand, by way of the great 
Russian rivers, and on the other Central Europe, especially the region 
of the Danube. 

I shall treat these matters with greater detail in succeeding 
chapters : for the present I should like to state in general terms, what 
the classical worla gave to South Russia, and what it received from 
South Russia in return. 


South Russia is a great region of steppes, which merge into the 
steppes of Central Asia on the east and those of Hungary on the west. 
Rut nomadic life is not the only type of life w T hich can nourish on the 
South Russian steppes. They provide excellent pasturage, but at the 
same time, if employed for agriculture, they yield admirable results, 
thanks to the richness of the black soil, to the comparatively favourable 
rainfall , and to the great rivers which cross them from north to south. 
Consequently the Russian steppes, open on all sides, attracted not 
only the Eastern nomads, but also the hunting and agricultural peoples 
of Central Russia and the Danubian region : these settlers became 
closely attached to their new home, and remained there for century 
after century. There is ample archaeological evidence to prove it. 
In the period of the earliest burials with contracted skeletons, the use 
of cereals was already known, and there is nothing to show that the 
makers of these graves were not the same people from the neolithic 
i, period as far down as the arrival of Cimmerians and Scythians in the 
Iron Age. No doubt this population was affected by influences from 
various quarters, particularly from the Caucasus, the Black Sea, and 
the region of the Danube. There was probably migration and partial 
infiltration of tribes from east, north, and west. But the mass of the 
population remained unchanged, and retained for centuries its old 
customs, its old observances, and probably its old beliefs. 

Much has been written about the corridor of the steppes — the 

great migrational route along which the Oriental hordes poured into 

Central Europe. It cannot be denied that the corridor existed, and 

was used by the nomads of Central Asia. But the instability of life 

i in this corridor has been greatly exaggerated. 

In speaking of life on the South Russian steppes there is one fact 
of the deepest significance which is usually ignored and which com- 
pletely changes the aspect of the problem. The nomads from the 
East were invariably conquering tribes, not numerous, but well 
organized, which imposed themselves on a sedentary agricultural 
population. This is true of the first conquerors, the Cimmerians ; of 
the Scythians who followed them ; and of the Sarmatians who took 
the place of the Scythians. The new-comers found admirable pastur- 
age for their beasts in the steppes. The subject population was a 
comparatively wealthy one, so that tribute was easy to exact. Finally, 
the invaders inherited the commercial relations of the conquered. In 
consequence they had every inducement to settle down in that fine 
countiy for as long a period as political conditions allowed. As long 
as their military- forces were sufficient to defend the conquered terri- 
tory against attacks from east and west, they stayed in South Russia 


and did not dream of leaving it. Hence the conquerors were never 
mere passengers in the Russian steppes : they founded more or less 
stable kingdoms. So the Cimmerians, who settled round the straits 
of Kerch (the Cimmerian Bosphorus) : so also the Sevthians, whose 
political centre, as we shall presently see, was originally the valley of 
the Kuban and later the steppes between Don ana Dnieper. 

These protracted sojourns of conquering peoples in South Russia, N * 
and the establishment of settled states, resulted in the formation of 
material cultures combining elements of an indigenous culture which 
was already, as we shall see, considerably developed, with the elements 
of O ri ental civilization brought by the conquerors , These mixed civili- 
zations also absorbed cultural elements coming from the south by way / 
of the Caucasus and the Black Sea. 

This significant fact lends additional interest to the history of the 
Cimmerian power, of the Scythian state, and of the Sarmatian and 
Gothic states. Little is known of the Cimmerian civilization sub- 
merged by the Scythians. Yet there is an important consideration 
which leads one to hope that future discoveries will dispel the mystery. 
A glance at the map will show that the corridor of the steppes forms 
two securely protected pockets. One is the Kuban delta, the penin- 
sula of Taman : the other is the Crimea, especially the region of 
Kerch and the mountainous part of the peninsula. It was here that 
the Cimmerians, hard pressed by the Scythians, finally resorted, and 
united with the Greeks to form the kingdom of Bosphorus : here 
that the Scythians, vanquished by the Sarmatians on the east, and by 
the Thracians on the west, took refuge in the second century b. c. : 
here, lastly, that the Goths, beaten back by Turkish and Mongolian 
invaders, founded the kingdoms of the Tetraxite Goths and the 
kingdom of Hangup. We are therefore fully justified in hoping that 
in this part of the world we shall find sure traces of the Cimmerians, 
not only from the period of Cimmerian supremacy on the northern 
shores of the Black Sea, but from other periods as well. 

The permanence of certain political formations in the steppes of 
Russia is a fact of extreme importance. It enables us, above all, to 
realize the nature of the Scythian kingdom — a formation almost 
completely Iranian, a northern counterpart of the kingdom of 
Darius and Xerxes. We are but ill acquainted with the Iranian 
world, although its influence on classical civilization was enormous. 
We are fortunate in being able to study another portion of it, different 
from that which created the Persian kingdom. The Iranians of the 
Black Sea were not confined to the northern shore. It has been 
demonstrated by recent discoveries, that a considerable section of the 


Scythian tribes established itself on the other side of the ; Black Sea, 
in the country which afterwards became Armenia and Pontus. The 
Question has often been asked, how Pontic civilization acquired its 
?S character" and what was the origin of the trad, ions 

Sedates. It has been suggested that ^""W^^jSi 
and colonized by Persia. But we must bear m mind that the ^""j 8 
were not a colonizing people, and that their long supremacy m Am 
Mnor and in Egypt left but faint traces behind^. I am therefore 
incunedw belief that part of the population of Pontus, Cappadoca 
Lnd Annenia consisted of ScythiaTwho settled there at the ume of 
the «eS Scythian invasion in the seventh century I shall discuss 
tts auction later ; for the present I merely rcmmd the reader that 
hasted in Armenia. dLng the classical period j*»Jn* 
called Sakasene and Skythene, that is to say, districts inhabited by 
Sains ^d Scythians" Further, there was -« ft»f» a religious 
festival called Sakaia : many attempts have been made :to explain^ the 
name : it can easily be accounted for by the presence in Pontus ot 
p^ons calling themselves Sakai and formmg an >^^ . ^ 
of the population. I should like to mention here, for I shall not 
return to the subject, certain archaeological date which point to 
X resemblances between the two shores of the Euxine the 
n^hem^nd the southern, Firs, of . all the generd I physicgn omytf 
the town of Panticapaeum is remarkably s.milar to tha t ot sever* 
cities on the southern shore, particularly Amisos and . Sl "»PJ- ^ 
relation between acropolis and town, and the general srtuafcon are 
the same ' in both Peaces important alterations were made in the 
p^Uctureof me across rock ; the character of the cemeterj 
Is the same in both, consisting almost exclusively of two types ot 
molmen^rock-cut chamber!, and massive barrows surmounting 
mmbs of dressed stone. The same features recur in Paphlagon.a, as 
firibri taE -masterly work of Leonhardt We «**«*££ 
particular the great tomb of Kalekapu, where the sculptural decora- 
tion consisting of Babylono-Pereian griffins with heads of horned 
ons, tons an! so forth! though later, as Hugo Pnnz has pomt^ out 
han the architectural decoration, is still of the archaic period the 
seventh century B.C. : the sculptured figures seem to m m , pwwt 
a remarkable resemblance to the figures on «" #> «^*SKSrf 
and to works of Panticapaean toreutic art. Compare the «•«*««« 
the arms of Panticapaeum, the griffin and the lion on the gold states 
of the Bosphorus in the fourth century B.C., with the ^ponding 
ficures on the Kalekapu tomb. Compare with the same figures the 
Uo^s and griffins on the silver vases from Solokha. 1 am inclined to 


3 4 


IV-II1 Cent. 
', 2, 4- A&hmolean Museum. 3, Louvre 


see in the Paphlagonian sculptures, or in their Assyro-Persian proto- 
types, the immediate sources from which the Panticapaean metal- 
workers derived their inspiration. 

We observe also remarkable analogies between certain products of 
Cappadocian art and objects found in Scythian graves of the period 
between the sixth and the third centuries B.C. I would draw the 
reader's attention to a number of cast bronze pole-heads which 
have been discovered in Cappadocia (pi. II and pL V, 3) : some- 
times representing an animal perched on a rattle, sometimes a figure 1 *-^ 
or a pair of figures, geometrically stylized, of the Great Goddess 
of Asia, The only parallels to these curious objects, of which there 
are several examples in the Louvre and in the British Museum, are 
furnished by pole-tops found in Scythian barrows of the period 
between the sixth and third centuries B.C., and in Western Siberia. I ( 1 
Let me also mention the tetra-cotta statuettes from Pontus and 
Cappadocia in the Ashmolean Museum and in the Louvre, which 
undoubtedly represent Scythian horsemen (pi. I). These horsemen are 
treated in the same manner and in the same style as the Scythian 
horsemen on works of Panticapaean toreutic dating from the fourth 
I or third centuries B.C. 

In conclusion, I would draw attention to a curious coincidence : 
terra-cotta wagons have been found in Pontus and in Cappadocia 
which reproduce, beyond all doubt, the wheeled abodes of the nomads: 
a well-preserved example may be seen in the Ashmolean Museum. 
Now, as far as I know, the only analogous objects come from South 
Russia. We have two series of them, one belonging to the Bronze Age, 
the other to the first and second centuries a. d. A chariot which 
closely resembles the Ashmolean specimen was found in a Kuban 

frave of the Bronze Age : a whole group, of much finer execution, in 
anticapaean graves of the first ana second centuries A. D. 
These resemblances between the two shores of the Euxine cannot 
be explained by commercial intercourse, but only by community 
of race ; by the existence of similar layers of population in both 
regions : a layer which may be called autochthonous j a Thraco- 
Cimmerian; and a Scytho- Iranian layer. 

Let us now return to the Scythians of South Russia. We find in 
South Russia, as I have already said, a whole group of products 
partly manufactured by the Iranians themselves, partly for the Ira- 
nians by the Greeks. This Iranian world is the pre-Zoroastrian one 
which disseminated the cults of Mithra and of Anaitis, the two 
Iranian divinities who exerted a potent influence on the classical 
civilization of Hellenistic and Roman times. Unfortunately these 



Iranians, the Scythians, have left us no written monuments. But their 
figurative monuments, which have come down to us in great numbers, 
enable us to approach the difficult task of reconstructing their political, 
social, economic, and religious life. 

This Iranian society was not isolated. Through the Greek 
colonies it had constant intercourse with the inhabitants of the Medi- 
terranean seaboard. The development of the Greek colonies, and the 
character which Greek civilization assumed on the shores of the Black 
Sea, is a subject of the greatest importance, More of this later : for 
the present I will only observe that the Greek colonies on the Black 
~^ji Sea owed their very existence to the formation of stable kingdoms on 
the Russian steppes : th e Cimme rian, and later the Scythian Kingdom. 
The Black Sea colonies, exposed as they were to attack from the north, 
could only survive and prosper if the surrounding country was in a 
more or less settled condition. Just as the prosperity of the Greek 
colonies in Asia Minor depended on the existence of the kingdoms of 
Lydia and of Persia, of which they were the maritime outlets, so 
Glbia, Panticapaeum, and Chersonesus only throve because a united 
kingdom in the Russian steppes guaranteed them free intercourse 
with the peoples on the banks of the great Russian rivers. Scythians 
and Greeks constituted an economic unit, and their mutual influence 
was necessarily the dominant factor in their lives. 

This close relation led to very interesting results, above all to the 
foundation of the kingdom of the Bosphorus in the very home of 
Cimmerian power. A Milesian colony with a barbarian name, 
gradually transforming itself into a territorial power supreme on both 
banks of the Cimmerian Bosphorus, governed by a dynasty of archons, 
and later by kings with partly Greek and partly Thracian names : this 
unique phenomenon is surely worthy of the closest attention. It 
must not be forgotten that the existence of this kingdom was of capital 
importance for the Athenian state before, during, and after the Pelo- 
ponnesian War. The Bosphorus was sometimes the principal or the 
only centre of supply providing the Greek world with cereals and 
with fish. 

What is the explanation of the complex aspect of the Bosphoran 
state and the peculiar features of Greek civilization in the Bosphorus ? 
I shall treat trie question in my fourth chapter. I will confine myself 
here to stating a few outstanding points. The archons of Panti- 
capaeum styled themselves archons of Panticapaeum and of Theo- 
dosia, and kings of the native peoples, Sindians, Maeotians, and the 
like. This twofold authority gives the key to the explanation. The 
state of the Bosphorus was a coalition of the population of the Greek 



cities and of the natives inhabiting part of the Crimea and of the 
Tam&n peninsula. The Thracian names of the Bosphoran dynasts 
show that the native population, or at least the dominant part of it, 
was of Thracian stock : it possessed a high and ancient civilization, 
and was promptly hellenized. It must be borne in mind that the 
straits of Kerch — the Cimmerian Bosphorus, an old and significant , 
name — were the centre of the Cimmerian kingdom, and that the /' 
Cimmerians were probably of Thracian origin. Is it not natural to 
suppose that the Bosphoran state was a Greco-Cimmerian state, and 
that this alliance gave the new body strength to resist the attacks of 
the Scythians ana to preserve its independence even against the 
imperialism of Periclean Athens ? 

We shall follow the political and social fortunes of the Bosphoran 
state in our fourth chapter. But before I go farther, I would draw 
the reader's attention to one or two important considerations. How 
curious, this semi-Greek tyranny which lasted for centuries and 
gradually changed into a Hellenistic monarchy with the same charac- 
teristics as Bitnynia, Pontus, Armenia, Parthia, and Commagene — 
hellenized states resting on Thracian, Iranian, Thraco-Iranian, and 
Syrian foundations I How interesting, the mixed religion which 
slowly developed in the Cimmerian Bosphorus ! How singular this 
proline art, working mainly for export to Scythian dynasts and the 
Scythian aristocracy ! How remarkable, the social and economic 
organization, based on great domains methodically exploited, on a 
complex system of exportation, and on active and regular commercial 
intercourse with the neighbouring kingdoms ! 

The Scythian kingdom, on wruch the material prosperity of the 
Greek colonies and of the Cimmerian Bosphorus depended, was 
succeeded in the Russian steppes by an ascendancy of various Sarma- | 
tian tribes— Iranians, like the Scythians themselves. The Sarm atiansj_ 
as every one knows, played a prominent part in the historyoF~tEe — 


Roman Empire. It w as they, wi th the Germanic and_Thracian tribes 
w^^^ilt ^^firsrtorm gable blows gjhejQJUJig-Roman power on 
the Danube It was theyw ho mingled witn_the Goths arid spread 
with t hem" ove r Centra l" Europe as far as rtaTjrahd~Spain. What did 
we know about "the Sarmafmns before the recent discoveries in the 
Russian steppes ? A few lines of Tacituau. of Valerius ]Raccus, of 
Arrian , a few phrases in Ammianus Marcelltnus, the reiiersof Trajan's 
column and of the arch of Galerius at Salonica : altogether very little. 
The excavations in the Kuban barrows, the great find of Novo- 
cherkassk, the gold plaques from Siberia, the discoveries in the Ural 
steppes, showed for the first time that the Sarmatians were by no 




means barbarians, Iranians like the Scythians, they brought a high 
culture along with them, and adopted elements from Greek and Greco- 
Scythian civilization. As soon as they reached the banks of the Don 
and of the Kuban, they entered into close relations with the inhabi- 
tants of the Bosphorus and mingled with the population, transforming 
the kingdom of the Bosphorus, both politically and in religious 
matters, into a semi -Iranian state. 

What is extremely important, is that out of all these elements, the 
Sarmatians created a peculiar culture and in particular an original and 
characteristic style of art. I refer to the renaissance of the Scythian 
animal style, which combined with the use of precious stones and 
enamel, led to the formation, at Panticapaeum and in the Russian 
steppes, of the polychrome style of jewellery which was adopted by 
the Goths and is wrongly called Gothic. The style is not Gothic at 
all : it is Iranian— if you like, Sarxnatian. And it was not the Goths 
but the Sarmatians who introduced itTTntQ Central and Southern 

These then are the links uniting South Russia with the classical 
world. There are others which unite it with Central Russia and with 
the Slavonic Russia which was to be. From the remotest period, 
progress in South Russia has invariably been echoed by progress in 
Central and Eastern Russia. The Copper Age, the Bronze Age, and, 
most of all, the Iron Age in Russia were deeply influenced by the south. 
The Iron Age on the Volga, and even more on the Kama, peculiar as it 
is, is bound by a thousand ties to the Scythian world of South Russia. 
And it was the Sarmatian epoch which impressed its character on the 
Middle Iron Age and on the earliest Slavonic antiquities, which were 
influenced, on the other hand, by uninterrupted contact with the 
Greek culture of Byzantium and with the Oriental world of the Turkish 
and Mongolian nomads who inherited the Greco- Iranian civilizations 
of South Russia. 


British Museum and Louvre 



THROUGHOUT the classic East— in Mesopotamia, in Elam, in 
Turkestan, and in Egypt — the dawn of civilized life is marked by 
two phenomena, one characteristic of the neolithic age, the other 
of the earliest metal periods. I refer to the splendid development 
of pottery in the neolithic period, especially painted pottery with 
naturalistic and geometric decoration ; and to the wonderful impetus 
which civilization received, in all these places, at the metal epoch, fit* 
The painted pottery of Central Asia, of Susa, of Turkestan, of Meso- 
potamia, of Asia Minor, of Egypt, still belongs to the prehistoric 
period ; but in several of these regions the age of metals inaugurates 
a historic period which is accompanied not only by artistic develop- 
ment but also by written documents. The proto-historic epoch is 
marked by rich civilizations which make copious use of metals, 
especially copper and, later, bronze — never iron — and which we are 
accustomed to call copper and bronze civilizations, on the analogy of 
the prehistoric epochs in Central Europe, although the names are 
singularly inappropriate to the abundant and varied life of the East 
in the third millennium B.C. 

Southern Europe passed through the same stages. No need to 
speak of the brilliant Cretan or Aegean civilization, in which a period 
of neolithic painted pottery, and a chalcolithic period, were succeeded 
by a rich historic life, with which we are ill acquainted it is true, 
but only because we are unable to decipher Aegean texts. We must 
examine, however, the corresponding phenomena in the civilized life 
of Central and Eastern Europe, seeing that the region of the Russian 
steppes was one of prime importance, as the home not only of a 
neolithic painted pottery but of a metal civilization of particular 

The two areas do not coincide. The painted pottery is charac- 
teristic of the neolithic and chalcolithic epoch on the banks of the 
great western rivers, the Dniester, the Bug, and the Dnieper, whereas 
the metal culture principally flourished on the banks of the Kuban , 
at the other extremity of the steppes. 



The neolithic painted pottery of the Ukrainian or Tripdlye tyj 
so called from a hamlet near Kiev where Chvojka found the first 
examples, belongs to a group of Central and South European pottery 
which we call spiral and maeander pottery. Wherever it is found, it is 
partly painted and partly incised » Its presence has been observed in 
several districts, from the shores of the Adriatic to the shores of the 
Black Sea* Its expansion coincides approximately with the basins of 
the Danube and its tributaries, of the Dniester, the Bug, and the 
Dnieper. I cannot deal with all the difficult and delicate questions 
which have been raised by the various types of this ware : which 
came first, incised or painted decoration ; what was the principal 
centre, the shores of the Adriatic, or the shores of the Black Sea ; and 
what is the relation between this pottery and the different racial groups 
which subsequently formed the population of Western Europe. 

What concerns us chiefly is the generally accepted fact that the 
Tripolye type of painted pottery — the pottery of South Russia, 
Galicia, and Rumania — is the richest and most highly developed 
branch of the family, and the most original as well. The shapes show 
great wealth and variety compared with those on the Danube and its 
tributaries. The ornamentation is by no means restricted to spiral 
and maeander. As in the contemporary pottery of Susa, the geometric 
decoration is combined with geometrizing animal and vegetable decora- 
tion which uses as ornaments figures of men, animals, and plants. 
Even the arrangement of the ornament in parallel zones, and the 
so-called metopic style of decoration, is not unknown in the painted 
pottery of South Russia. In South Russia, as everywhere else, the 
spiral and maeander pottery is accompanied by numerous clay figures 
of very various primitive types, representing human beings— especially 
women — animals, pieces or furniture, and sacred implements. 

The systematic excavations of Chvojka and of Volkov on the 
Dnieper, of Ernst von Stern in Bessarabia, of Hubert Schmidt in 
Rumania, and of Hadaczek in Galicia, have shown that the men who 
produced the painted pottery were by no means wholly primitive : 
they were no longer hunters or nomads : they dwelt in villages, 
sometimes fortified ; owned houses of a common neolithic form, 
half cave, half hut ; lived on agriculture ; and had a great number of 
domestic animals at their disposal. We have no decisive evidence as 
to their mode of burial. The best-preserved pots and figurines were 
found neither in houses nor in tombs, but in curious structures 
. suggesting, on the one hand, a Roman columbarium, on the other, 
| a temple for religious ceremonies connected with funerals. These 
structures are sometimes of considerable size ; they were roofed, and 


had walls of clay and wattle ; the floor, of rammed earth, was littered 
with all kinds of funeral offerings, especially vases, some of them 
perhaps funerary urns containing the bones and ashes of the dead. 
The structures are always found in groups, arranged in concentric 
circles with two or three larger ones in the middle : they were built 
on flat elevations beside a river or a ravine. 

These buildings all date from the neolithic or the chalcohrhic age : 
none is later. To the same period belong the thousands of graves which 
arc found, often in fairly large groups, all over South Russia, not only 
in the steppes but in the woodland as well — graves covered with a 
barrow, and containing contracted skeletons more or less thickly 
daubed with red paint. The oldest graves of this kind are very poor 
ones and undoubtedly belong to nomads. It has often been asked, 
how these graves are related to the neolithic and chalcolithic villages 
and funerary structures described above, those which are charac- 
terized by the pottery with spirals and maeanders. I cannot linger 
over this question ; but I believe that the neolithic population which 
produced the spiral and maeander pottery superposed itself on a 
portion of the population with contracted skeletons, influenced it 
profoundly, and was absorbed in its turn by new-comers of the same 
origin as itself. This process of influence and absorption introduced 
noticeable alterations into the life of the nomads who buried their 
dead in the contracted position and covered them with red paint. 
We find evidence of the change in a good many different places. In 
the district of Kharkov, as Gorodts6v has observed, the nomads 
gradually became a sedentary agricultural people, modified their type 
of sepulchral structure, and developed their primitive pottery by 
introducing new shapes and by decorating their vases with incised, 
and sometimes painted, ornaments, borrowed from their neighbours 
in the region of the Dnieper. This new civilization, which was also 
affected, m its weapons and metal implements, by the chalcolithic 
culture of the Kuban, exercised, in its turn, a very powerful influence 
on Central Russia, where it gave rise to the so-called Fatianovo civili- 
zation. Again, in the region of the Dnieper, the Bug, and the Dniester, 
the superposition of nomads upon the agricultural population pro- 
duced a mixed culture which lasted right through the bronze epoch, 
and which is represented by a number of barrows recently excavated 
near Sevastopol, near Odessa, and in Podolia. 

The most important point to observe is that civilized life never 
ceased in the western part of South Russia, and that during the Bronze 
Age the inhabitants remained sedentary and agricultural. They had 
no rich metallic culture until the arrival of conquerors bringing iron. 




This is easy to understand. There is no copper in the Russian steppes, 
and none in Central Russia. The only good copper mines are far 
away—in the Ural, in Transcaucasia, and in Hungary. Objects 

groduced in these regions found their way to the Russian steppes, 
ut we cannot expect to find such objects in great numbers. The 
steppes had nothing to offer in exchange for precious articles. The 
time had not yet come when the corn, the nsh, and the leather of 
South Russia found a certain and permanent market in countries which 
abounded in gold, silver, copper, and iron. 

The conditions in the valley of the Kuban were very different. 
The Kuban valley, rich in natural produce, always served as a granary 
for the mountainous and alpine regions of Central Caucasus, which 
had plenty of fruit but w r ere poor in cereals. Now Central Caucasus 
and Transcaucasia abound in metals, especially copper and iron. It is 
well known that the most ancient Greek writers always affirmed that 
iron and even copper— as to copper there was a difference of opinion — 
were ' invented * by the peoples of Transcaucasia. A recently pub- 
lished papyrus from Oxyrhynchus, containing fragments of Helfanicus, 
gives a new version of the current story : according to this version, 
the use of iron weapons was introduced by one Saneunos, a Scythian 
king. I have not the least doubt that the mines of Transcaucasia 
furnished much of the copper w'hich was fashioned into weapons, 
implements, and objects of art in Mesopotamia ; as to the precious 
metals, especially gold, I need only recall the legend of the Argonauts 
and the Golden Fleece : I shall return to the question later. Silver 
was extracted in great quantities from the mines in the country of the 
Chalybians. Is it not natural that the copper and precious metals of 
the Caucasus should have easily found their way, probably by sea, to 
the fertile valley of the Kuban ? We know that the inhabitants of the 
Black Sea littoral, and particularly of the Crimea and the Caucasian 
coast, were always intrepid sailors, and that in historic times they 
practised a piracy which was difficult to repress, even with the regular 
fleet of the Bosphoran kingdom. I am convinced that it was they 
who from the earliest times transported the metals of Transcaucasia 
to the seaports in the Straits of Kerch. These seaports were probably 
active hundreds of years before the Greeks settled there. One of 
them was certainly Panticapaeum. The barbarian name of the town, 
and the legend, preserved by Stephanus of Byzantium, that it was 
founded by a son of Aietes, king of those Colchians who appear in the 
story of the Argonauts, testify to the great antiquity of the town, to 
its ancient intercourse with the Caucasus, and to its existence as a 
seaport long before the arrival of the Milesians. 1 take it that two 


3 * 


Third Millennium e.c. Hermitage, Pclrograd 


other seaports had the same history, Phanagoria and, in particular, 
Hermonassa, which are situated on the other side of the straits, at the 
mouth of the Kuban . With regard to Hermonassa, Hecataeus informs 
us that there was another place of the same name, near Trebizond, the 
chief port of the Transcaucasian mining district. Perhaps Trebizond, 
a very ancient Greek colony, took part in the foundation of the Cauca- 
sian Hermonassa, at the period when the Greeks were planting colonies 
in the principal centres of civilized life on the Black Sea, I have no 
doubt that tne Carians, and after them the lonians, inherited their 
commercial relations from their prehistoric predecessors. We need 
not be surprised, therefore, that the oldest cemeteries in the Kuban 
valley, which belong to the copper age, are exceptionally rich, espe- 
cially in weapons, implements, and artistic objects, of copper, silver, 
and gold, which can only be compared with the objects of the same 
copper period from the ruins and cemeteries of Elam, Mesopotamia, 
and Egypt. 

The most interesting of these Kuban graves is that discovered by 
Veselovski in the town of Maikop, under a monumental kurgan 
10*65 metres high (fig. 1). At the level of the soil a circular enclosure 
had been made of undressed stone, and in the centre a great sepulchral 
trench dug, 142 metres deep. The walls of the trench were lined 
with wood, and the floor was of pebbles. At the corners, wooden 
posts supported the wooden roof 01 the tomb. A thin layer of earth 
was placed on this roof, and above it another much broader roof. 
Inside, the grave was divided into three by partitions, one partition 
dividing the grave into two halves, the other dividing one of the halves 
into two others. The chief part of the tomb, the southern, was 
reserved for the corpse, which lay in a contracted position with the 
hands raised to the nead. The whole skeleton was covered with red 
paint. The funeral furniture of the principal grave was extremely 
sumptuous : the skeleton was strewn all over with gold ornaments, 
originally, no doubt, sewn on to the clothing ; figures of lions, in two 
sizes (pi. IV, 5 and 7) ; figures of oxen (pi. IV, 6) ; rings ; rosettes ; 
gold, turquoise, and carnelian beads. Under the skull were found two 
narrow strips of gold, pierced with eyelets, probably for sewing orna- 
ments on to them (pi. IV, 1) ; earrings ; and other gold jewels. 
Beside the skeleton were six gold and silver rods, four of which passed 
through figures of oxen, of solid gold and silver, attached near then- 
lower ends (pi. IV, 2-4). The upper ends of the rods were pierced 
for laces or ribbons. Alongside the rods were seventeen vases of gold, 
silver, and stone, two of them with engraved designs (pL III, 1-4) : of 
these I shall speak later. The tomb also contained several weapons and 


implements of polished stone and of copper, and several copper and clay 
vases . In each of the two other co mpartmen ts there was a notner skeleton 
covered with red paint, one female and one male : the furniture was 
similar, but less rich. Farmakovski has inferred, from a minute study 

Fee. t. 

of the objects in the tomb, that the principal personage was buried 
with a tiara, of cloth or felt, on his head, and that this tiara was orna- 
mented in front by two golden diadems studded with golden rosettes ; 
that the gold and silver rods probably belonged to a Tuneral canopy, 
the edges of which were decorated with gold plaques ; that at the 
interment the rods of the canopy were placed beside the body, and 


the body covered with the curtain of the canopy. The dead man was 
evidently no ordinary person, but the chief or king of a tribe. 

The Maikop grave is no exception* Although the explorers of the 
Caucasus paid little attention to graves with contracted and painted 
skeletons, and directed most of their efforts to discovering richer 
Scythian tombs, they were nevertheless so fortunate as to find four 
graves contemporary with the Maikop grave and rivalling it in the 
splendour of their furniture. As to graves with similar though poorer 
furniture, they can be counted by dozens if not by hundreds, It is 
quite certain that in the copper age the Northern Caucasus, especially 
the valley of the Kuban, was thickly populated, and that the inhabi- 
tants were wealthy enough to build monumental tombs and to sur- 
round the dead not merely with rough clay vessels but with precious 
objects of copper, gold, and silver. F shall give a short account of the 
four finds mentioned above. 

In 1898, while digging for clay in the Cossack village (stamtsa) of 
Staromyshastovskaya, workmen found a silver vessel of the same ovoid 
shape as the Maikop vases ; it contained a number of precious objects 
resembling those at Maikop : a golden diadem with rosettes, a silver 
figure of an ox with a hole in its back for suspension or for the insertion 
of a rod, hundreds of gold and carnelian beads which originally formed 
one or more necklaces and bracelets, a lion's head in gold, belonging 
to one of the necklaces, and several earrings each composed of gold 
rings of various sizes interlinked. 

Even more extraordinary are the two graves discovered in kurgans 
near the village of Tsarskaya. The wooden framework of the MaiKop 
grave is replaced by stone structures which recall, with singular 
insistence, the well-known dolmens of the same period in Northern 
Caucasus. These structures were composed of big slabs forming 
stone-boxes or tomb chambers each divided into two by a cross-slab. 
Both chambers had stone roofs, one roof being gabled, the other flat. 
One corpse was buried in each stone-box ; the corpse occupied one 
compartment, the other was filled with tomb furniture. In both 
graves the bodies were contracted and covered with a thick coat of 
red paint ; the same paint was used on the walls of the second stone- 
box and on certain objects in the grave. The furniture of both graves 
was extremely rich and copious : it is of the same character as at 
Maikop, but the objects are clumsier and less distinguished. There is 
no doubt, however, that Maikop and Tsarskaya Stanitsa are con- 
temporary. The Tsarskaya kurgans show the same combination of 
stone and copper implements, without any bronze, the same wealth of 
gold and silver, the same shapes of earring, and the same abundance 


of stone and metal beads. It is impossible for me to enumerate the 
scores of objects found in these graves : I shall indicate only the most 
characteristic. Among the weapons, the forks or spikes are particu- 
larly curious : one of them is decorated with little human figures. 
Curious also, the remains of a fur coat and of other garments in the 
second stone-box. The dead man was covered by a black fur coat, the 
fur turned outwards, with a silver collar j under the fur was a tissue 
of yellow dow T n, and under this, on the body itself, remains of a linen 
garment with a painted border of purplish red. 

The last grave which I wish to mention was found in 1909 at 
IJlski, a village of the Mountain Tatars. The most interesting finds 
were a model of a wagon and fragments of five or six female statuettes 
in clay and of two others in alabaster. This grave is undoubtedly later 
than the preceding : for, first, the grave is in the loose earth and not 
in the virgin soil ; secondly, the skeleton lies in an extended position ; 
and, thirdly, the type of pin is more advanced. Nevertheless, it still 
belongs to the copper age or to the early part of the bronze age. 

All these graves of which I have spoken bear witness to a high 
development of cultural life in the Northern Caucasus during the 
early copper age. But the copper age is of course a relative conception: 
it does not provide an absolute chronology. Yet absolute chronology 
is of the utmost importance to us. Is the copper age in Northern 
Caucasus contemporary with the copper age in Mesopotamia, in 
Turkestan, or in Egypt ? I believe it is, although most investigators 
deny this and attribute our finds not to the third but to the second 
millennium B.C. 

The reasons for my conclusion are derived from a stylistic com- 
parison of the artistic objects, especially the engraved silver vases, 
with similar objects found in Mesopotamia and in Egypt. 

I will begin with the engraved vessels from Maikop (pi. Ill), as they 
are the most artistic objects among the Kuban finds. The first (pi. Ill , 
i-z) has the usual shape of the Maikop vases — ovoid body, wide neck, 
no foot, two handles nailed to the neck for suspension. The engraved 
decoration (fig. 2) is disposed as follows : on the neck is represented 
a chain of mountains, interrupted by two spreading trees. Between 
the trees, a bear is standing on his bind legs to reach the fruit : the 
fruit is not indicated . On the body of the vase are two rivers flowing 
from the mountains and meeting in a sea or lake which occupies the 
bottom of the vase. At the mouth of one river a bird — duck or goose — 
is sitting on the water ; at the mouth of the second, a water-plant, 
probably a reed, grows on the bank. On the body of the vase are 
two rows of animals, four in each row ; in the first row, a bull, a wild 






x £ 

I—- *— 


fa c 

fa c ft. 

Cc! *"' «^ 

w " 5P 

> - 








3 5 

W O = 

£ -< 3 

< "2 

5 Q fa 

■4- O * 

« O o 

i> « 

. i *g 

S «* a 

fa E 

o £ 

< b 





ass — or rather Przhevalski's horse — , a lion with a bird on his back, ali 
facing left, and a second bull facing right : in the second row, a wild 
boar, a panther, and two antelopes, all facing left. The streams of the 
rivers are partly concealed by the bodies of the animals. 


The second vase (pi. Ill, 3-4) is of nearly the same shape, but the 
k is narrower and longer. The bottom is occupied by a large rosette, 


Fig. 3. 

which consists of three rows, one above the other, of round leaves 
placed crosswise, the same type of rosette as those which were sewn 
to the diadems of Maikop and Staromyshastovskaya. The whole body 
of the vase above the bottom is filled with a row of five animals and 
of three birds, all facing left : an antelope, a bull, a panther, a bird, 
and an antelope and a panther with birds on their backs. Below the 
neck of the vase is a narrow hatched strip. 

The shape of both vases, in its main lines, recalls the celebrated 
Entemena vase found at Tello. The technique is the same, each vase 


being hammered out of a single piece of metal. The engraving is not 
so delicate in the Maikop vases as in the Entemena vase, and reminds 
one rather of the engraving on the famous Ktsh spear-head, the form 
of which, I may remark, is very like that of the spear-heads from 
Tsarskaya Stanitsa. The primitiveness of the Maikop engravings, 
compared with the Entemena vase, is shown by the treatment of 
details t for water, leaves and branches, fur, horns, manes and 
plumage, the Maikop engraver uses simple straight lines set in parallel 
rows. In this respect the engraver of the Entemena vase works more 
freely than the artists of the Maikop vases, of the mother-of-pearl 
plaques from Tello, of the bone objects from proto-dynastic Egypt, or 
of the asphalt and ivory plaques from Elam. Look at the stylization 
of the lions' manes, and the plumage of the eagles, on the Entemena 
vase : there is no parallel to them on the Maikop vases, but only on 
the more developed palettes and the bone mountings of stone knives 
in proto-dynastic Egypt. 

The general arrangement of the figures on the Maikop vases and 
on the Maikop canopy is identical. It is the most archaic type of 
decoration : the elements which it uses are figures of animals, almost 
exclusively naturalistic, disposed either in parallel rows, or in complete 
disorder. There is hardly any attempt to combine the figures into 
groups, and such attempts as are made are of the most primitive 
description ; in the second row of the first vase the paw of the panther 
is placed on the back of the antelope ; and in both vases some of the 
animals have birds on their backs. We may notice in the two bulls 
on the first vase a timid suggestion of the later heraldic scheme of 
confronted animals. At the same time, some of the animals show a 
powerful realism, a striking faculty of keen observation. Such a com- 
bination of primitive methods in composition with strong naturalism 
in the rendering of individual animals is entirely foreign to later 
periods in the evolution of art. We come across survivals of it both 
^ULearly I onian art and i n theScy thian animal style, but it is sufficient 
to puTTrlese classes of monuments beside^ourvaies, to be convinced 
that in all essentials they are totally different. 

The only analog)' to this mixture of realism and of primitive 
schematization is presented by the oldest monuments of Elam and 
Egypt : the archaic Elamite seals witji^raws^of-aiiimaisj and the various 
products dfpre- arid proTu-dynasticEgypt , especiallythe bone mou ntings 
of stone knives and articles of toilet and furniture in bone and ivory. 
Less typical are the Egyptian stone palettes, where we already meet 
with attempts to unite the animals into groups, or to combine them 
with human figures, and so to produce a more elaborate arrangement. 


Some of these monuments, however, even later examples such as the 
well-known palette with three rows of animals and one of trees, 
preserve the primitive features of earlier productions : worth noticing, 
the resemblance in the treatment of trees on this palette and on the 
Maikop vases. But the primitive scheme on the Maikop vase is made 
more complex by the introduction of two rivers and a lake, of trees 
and mountains. In early Babylonian and Egyptian art, the introduction 
of landscape elements into the increasingly complicated representa- 
tions comes comparatively late : in Babylonia not earlier than the 
reign of Naramsin, on his celebrated stele and on contemporaneous 
seal-cylinders : in Egypt, during the earliest dynastic period, for 
instance, on the mace-head of * King Scorpion *. A glance at the 
monuments will show that the treatment of the landscape is entirely 
different from that on the Maikop vase. It must be noticed, however, 
that in the stylization of water the Maikop vase is akin to the mace- 
head of King Scorpion, while both differ greatly in this particular 
from the Babylonian monuments with their system of transverse, 
instead of longitudinal, lines : although the system is more advanced 
on the mace-head, where the lines are undulated, than on the Maikop 
vase, where straight lines are disposed in triangles. In the above- 
mentioned Babylonian and Egyptian monuments, the landscape is 
subordinated to the figures, and an effort is made to combine both 
elements into a whole, whereas on the Maikop vase landscape and 
animals are merely juxtaposed, the only exception being the bear 
climbing the tree. This very primitive treatment of landscape is by 
no means unknown in the earliest artistic monuments of Egypt. It is 
particularly interesting to compare the landscape on the Maikop vase 
with painted scenes of the same type on the ovoid clay pots of pre- 
dynastic Egypt. On the neck of such pots we often find a representa- 
tion of a chain of mountains, and on tne body rows of animals in the 
desert or by the Nile, sometimes in combination with trees, and 
beneath the animals what arc probably ships floating on the river, 
though some scholars prefer to recognize fortified villages. The most 
detailed representation of the kind, comprising a great number of 
human figures, was found painted on the walls of a prehistoric 
tomb at Hierakonpolis. The transition to the later system of 
landscape treatment is seen in bone objects , on which an elephant is 
sometimes portrayed standing on a mountain. The Maikop vase 
shows the same transitional character : here we find a survival of 
prehistoric motives, a juxtaposition of two entirely distinct schemes 
of ornamentation, and a first timid attempt to subordinate landscape 
to figures. 


The arrangement of the decoration on the second Maikop vase is 
no less typical. The nearest analogy to this arrangement is furnished 
by the well-known ivory mounting of a stone knife in the collection 
of Lord Carnarvon. Here as there — if the representation on the 
Maikop vase is unrolled — the centre is formed by a rosette. Round 
this rosette, with feet towards it, is a row of animals all moving in one 
direction. In both objects the purpose of the artist was plainly to 
represent wild beasts chasing tame animals — a goat and a bull. The 
likeness between the two designs is remarkable. 

I now pass to the rendering of the separate animals. The lions 
on the Maikop vase, and the lions sewn to the canopy, are of one and 
the same type. This proves that all the objects of the find were made 
in one workshop. The lions are characterized by a vivid naturalism, 
by a heavy, clumsy build, and by the primitive rendering of such 
details as eyes, ears, tails, and paws. The mane, for example, is either 
not rendered at all, or only summarily indicated, so that it assumes the 
form of a collar. In this respect the lions of Maikop differ widely from 
the lions of the Entemena vase and of the Egyptian palettes. I should 
like to draw particular attention to the form of the eyes, which is 
invariable in all the Maikop animals : the eye is either a circle with 
a dot in the middle, or it has a more oval shape and lacks the dot. 
Benedite, who has collected all the material as regards primitive 
renderings of the eye in pre-dynastic and proto-dynastic Egypt, con- 
siders these two forms the most ancient of all. The eyes are some- 
times exceedingly large. 

An almost perfect analogy to the lions of Maikop is to be found in 
the lions on ivory mountings of stone knives, especially those from 
Gebel-el-Araq and in the Carnarvon Collection. These have all the 
peculiarities of the Maikop lions : the same heavy and swollen 
body, the same absence of mane, the same round eyes, semicircular 
ears, and upturned tail. Of the same type are the lions on other knife- 
mountings, for instance, those at Brooklyn and in the Pitt- Rivers 
Collection, and on numerous articles of toilet and furniture from 
Hierakonpolis. This similarity is the more important as it testifies 
still further to the close relation, often pointed out by scholars, between 
these monuments and corresponding articles in Mesopotamia. On 
the other hand, the lions of the stone palettes are much more fully 
developed, freer in their movements, and more elaborate in detail, 
for instance in the mane. An intermediate position is occupied by the 
gold mounting of a mace-handle from Nubia. The whole structure 
of the lions on this handle is still of the early Asiatic type, the only 
difference being that the artist is already trying to represent the mane, 


significantly enough by means of geometric patterns as in the second 
Maikop vase. 

Before proceeding I must point out the close resemblance, in 
general ornamentation and in the treatment of animals, between the 
Nubian handle and, on the one hand, the Maikop objects, on the 
other the Egyptian ivories. The embossed work 01 the Maikop gold 
plaques and of the Nubian handle finds a parallel outside Egypt in the 
Sumerian objects from Astarabad recently published by myself. 

We may also notice the great similarity between the panthers on the 
second Maikop vase and on the Nubian handle : in both we find a 
tendency to render the fur of the animal by means of geometric orna- 
ments. The same peculiarity mav be observed in the well-known gold 
plaques, forming the mounting of a stone knife, in the Cairo Museum. 

The bulls of the Maikop find do not differ from each other or 
from the Staromyshastovskaya figurine. The type is constant : a 
huge head with an exceedingly long, almost square muzzle, enormous 
lyre-shaped horns, a massive body with drooping hind-quarters, short 
heavy legs, big round eyes with a dot in the middle. This type of 
bull is entirely foreign to Egypt. The only parallels are furnished by 
Elamitic and by one or two Sumerian monuments ; especially 
Elamitic seals, and seal-impressions on proto-Elamitic tablets. Very 
curious, the wild ass or Przhevalski's horse, the oldest representation 
of a horse on monuments. The animal on the Maikop vase is cer- 
tainly not an ass : a glance at the rows of asses on Egyptian palettes 
makes that clear. The only counterpart to our animal is the probably 
contemporary figure on an ivory plaque from Susa. The likeness is 
conspicuous : the same muscular body and expressive head, the same 
treatment of the mane and tail by means of straight tines. 

The wild boar and the bear are peculiar to our find. There are 
no representations of these animals on early monuments of the Near 
East or of Egypt. The types of bird are almost identical with those 
on various bone and ivory objects from Egypt. The Maikop birds 
are of course rougher and less individual than the Egyptian, but the 
stylistic treatment of the plumage is the same in every detail, 

The analysis of the artistic monuments of Maikop has shown 
throughout a very close affinity with the earliest monuments of the 
Near East and of Egypt, which belong to a period when the arts of 
Egypt and Asia were still closely related, and did not present any of 
the very marked differences observable during the historic period. The 
monuments of Maikop, though very similar to those of Elam, Sumer, 
and Egypt, are as original as any of these groups. I have no ground 
for affirming that the monuments of Elam were imported from 



Mesopotamia, nor can I suppose that there was regular and systematic 
importation from Mesopotamia to Egypt, or inversely. The objects 
of the same period found at Astarabad seem not to have been imported. 
The same is true of the North Caucasian monuments described 
above : they are certainly local products- Farmakovski has tried to 
prove that the chain of mountains on the Maikop vase reproduces the 
main outlines of the Caucasian mountains viewed from the north : 
he may be right ; the likeness is indeed striking. But the Maikop vases 
have many other peculiarities. The rendering of the mountains is 
much more naturalistic than on the Egyptian pots. The group of 
the bear and the tree presents the first attempt to combine tree and 
animal into a heraldic scheme, and remains unparalleled. The idea 
of giving a kind of map, or perhaps a representation of Paradise with 
its rivers, lakes, mountains, trees, and animals, is novel and indeed 
unique. The same attempt was made in Egypt with the same elements, 
but the methods adopted were entirely different. Finally, as Elam, 
Sumer, and Egypt have each their peculiar fauna, so has Maikop : 
for the elephants, giraffes, and snakes of Egypt we have the wild hoar, 
the bear, and the proto-horse. We are evidently dealing with a new 
branch of a great artistic movement, a movement which spread, in 
the period or transition to metallic culture, wherever it found the 
conditions favourable : that is to say, to Turkestan, to Elam, to Meso- 
potamia, to North Caucasus, to Egypt. It is worth observing that in 
all these regions the rich civilization of the copper age gave birth to 
a still richer and more highly developed civilisation of bronze. So 
also in North Caucasus. It is well known that the Caucasus and 
Transcaucasia were homes of one of the richest and most interesting 
developments of the bronze civilization : witness the wonderful 
discoveries in die cemeteries of Koban and in many parts of Trans- 
caucasia. I feel sure that this outburst originated in that high develop- 
ment of civilized life in Northern and perhaps in Southern Caucasus 
during the copper age, which is certified by the finds above analysed, 
I cannot deal with this problem at length, but I must draw attention 
to two cardinal points. In the bronze age the typical form of grave in 
the Caucasus is a combination of barrow with the so-called stone-box, 
which is undoubtedly a late imitation of a real dolmen, as in the Kuban 
graves described above* The same fact may be observed in the Crimea. 
The influence of the copper age on the bronze age cannot be denied. 
The second point which shows uninterrupted evolution and close 
connexion between the copper and the bronze age, is the intimate 
relation between the animal style which characterizes Caucasian 
ornamentation in the bronze age, and the primitive animal style of 


the Maikop grave. The influence of the primitive animal style is 
visible both in the strange bronze belts of Transcaucasia and Koban, 
and in Transcaucasian pottery. The peculiar combination of a fully 
developed geometric style with a very refined animal style has no 
analogy either in Mesopotamia and Iran or in Western Europe* The 
general arrangement of the decoration (rows of animals), and the 
geometric treatment of the animals and their different parts, both 
originated during the copper period. 

I will now give a brief analysis of the different categories of objects 
which are typical of the North Caucasian group of burials, I must 
first of all observe that the general assortment of objects is exactly 
typical of the copper, not of the bronze age, I have dealt with this 
subject at length in my article on the Treasure of Astarabad : here I 
will emphasize only the most important points. 

The assortment of weapons in the North Caucasian burials is no 
less, and perhaps more, archaic than in the Astarabad treasure : there 
are no swords, whereas swords are numerous in all bronze age burials ; 
and no arrows : the principal weapons are spears with leaf-shaped 
heads ; daggers reproducing the form of the Egyptian stone dagger s ; 
axes ; and forks or spikes with two or three prongsT Closely related to 
these peculiar forks are the very primitive hooks, undoubtedly weapons 
and not agricultural implements. Both forks and hooks see m to h ave 

J>ecn w idcs pr cad in South Russia during the copper age : they have 
beerT found, for "Ins tance^" in manyof "the g raves in the Khar kov 
district. Outside Northern Caucasus and South Russia theTork as a 
weapon is peculiar to the Orient. In my article on the Treasure of 
Astarabad I mentioned similar weapons found in Turkestan, and 
later, as a religious symbol, in Transcaucasia. I should like to add 
that this weapon is by no means foreign to Mesopotamia. In Meso- 
potamia as well as in other countries, almost all primitive weapons 
occame emblems of different deities. The ancient spear and the 
so-called boomerang became emblems of Marduk (see Ward, Seal- 
Cylinders^ pp. 399 ff.) ; the mace-head, of Shuqamuna, a Cassite deity 
related to Nergal (ibid., p. 403, 17). The fork, in its turn, was used as 
the emblem of Ramman-Adad, and came to represent the thunderbolt ; 
the prongs consequently acquired the form of rays (Ward, ibid., 
p. 399, 9). I am inclined to think that the sceptre of Ninib developed 
out of a combination of two primitive weapons — a fork with two prongs, 
and a mace. It is worth noting that these symbols were very frequently 
represented as standing on sacred animals : the spear and boomerang 
on a dragon, the sceptre of Ninib on a griffin, the thunderbolt on a 
bull (see Collection de CUrcq, Nos. 169, 173, 230, the dynasty of Ur) : 


thus providing an excellent analogy for the bulls fastened to the rods 
of the Maikop canopy (if a canopy it be : it is equally possible that 
the rods were sceptres, symbolizing the religious power of the king). 
Incidentally, I must point out that the best analogy for the ornamental 
treatment of the upper part of these rods is presented by a Sumerian 
monument : the copper mounting of the lower part of a mace from 
Telio, which is decorated with the same hatched ornament as the 
rods of Maikop (see Cros-Heuzey, Nmwelles Jouilles, p. 22). Besides 
these forks there is another weapon which is characteristic of the 
Northern Caucasus and the adjacent parts of South Russia : I mean 
the copper points, 6fkkoL t for fastening to spears (see Comptes Rendus f 
1898, pi. IV, 54 and 55) : the same weapon has been found in Elam 
(Delegation en Perse, Memoires, voL viii, p. 146, fig. 297). 

Toilet articles were very numerous in the Caucasian finds. A 
remarkable quantity of gold rings and gold beads were found in the 
graves. This abundance of gold rings, and particularly the string 
of rings, in different sizes, from Staromyshastovskaya, leads me to 
think that they were not mere ornaments, but units of exchange, like 
the ' lake- dwellers 1 purses' of the pile dwellings in Switzerland, and 
other finds of the same class and time. 

The toilet articles in the Caucasian graves enable us to verify the 
chronological result which we obtained from a stylistic analysis of the 
finds at Maikop and Staromyshastovskaya. The profusion of gold 
and silver objects in the Caucasian burials is, as I said, remarkable. 
It rivals the wealth of the famous treasure of Priam which belongs to 
the second period of Troy. But at the same time, the shapes 01 the 
r toilet article s on the Kuoan are far_more primitive than at Troy, 
although the general assortrnenT - presents^the same^*a^pec't~lrPboth 
places. In both places we find a limited choice of weapons — no 
swords or arrows, only spears and axes : in both, costly articles of 
feminine adornment, in three types — first, golden diadems ; secondly, 
necklaces and bracelets of gold beads ; thirdly, earrings : in both r a 
fine collection of gold and silver vases : in both, sets of large and small 
copper vessels. fhe absence of pottery in the treasure of Troy may 
be due to its being a treasure and not a burial. 

But in spite of this similarity, a comparative analysis of separate 

articles in the two finds shows that the Kuban articles are far more 

_pri mitjye than those of Troy. _ Take the diadems and the earrings, take 

the gold and silver vessels. It is evident that the Kuban burials belong 

to the pure copper age, the Trojan treasure to the early bronze period. 

Let me analyse the various categories of objects more carefully. 
I begin with the vessels. In the two series, only the plainest and most 


primitive forms coincide-the spherical and the wide-necked ovoid 
The more complex forms are represented in the Trojan finds alone 

h T™ h^T h ** e "° trU * handl£S ' on 'y riveted ^pension £*£ 
In Troy handles are common enough, though some of the vessel 
preserve the old fashion. Nooffset feel at Maikop.many at Troy The 
copper vessels of Ma-kop and Tsarskaya have the same primShane 
they have no handles : at Troy, handles had already begun to bf US ed' 

TrovZd In^hlT ( ° the dk 1 emS - The "ationf the stnTat 
J«?Li * • Cau t casua ~ a bng narrow strip with rounded ends 

greatly. 1 hey are much richer and more complex at Troy, althoueh 
the forms of the individual ornaments remain very primitive g 

I he same is true of the necklace and bracelet beads' Great 
quantities of gold beads were found both at Troy and in the Caucasus 

IrZ!ST T TF b£ad 1 ! n ^ e ^"^ treasure - A » «he plaines 
forms of bead, at Troy and in the Caucasus, coincide: pearl-shaped 
beads; the same wth nbs ; annular; hemispherical; beidslike pahs 
of truncated cones; others like perforated quadrilateral tubes. ? mt 

har to Troy. Many of die types, chiefly the simplest, have been found 

in Sumeras we H. TfagJCu ban earrings are very p rimhive : plain S 

rings with beads appendecTlSts-oT rings. In ^TroyliTe earrmgs mav 

J^educedjojhe same prototypes, but they ariToften v^iTelalfefate ' 

n„ fiTiFT at u y ^ various and com P le *. especially the heads. " 
Un the Kuban they are very simple, as in the burials with contracted 
skeletons generally. The only effort to improve the form consists in 
bendmg the upper part of the pin : there is no trace of an attempt to 
wind this bow into a spiral or to give it, the shape of a swan's neck 
as was usual in the bronze age. In the Ulski grave, but there alone 
the crooked ends of the pins were provided with balls, just as in the 
burials ot the middle Hittite period near Carchemish. 
__htnally, we m ust noti ce thatjn Troyjhe ornament is already pure 
jeomelric^ffinojracesof the elaborate ammff styfelvTucn we found" 
in Warn in Mesopotamia, in Egypt, and in die Caucasus. 

I he foregoing analysis proves that the finds of Troy and the finds 
01 the Kuban, though akin, are not contemporaneous, the Kuban finds 
being much older. 

I have already pointed out more than once that the Ulski grave 
is later than the other burials in the Kuban. It is interesting 
to note, that in this grave, and there only, female statuettes, of 
a very primitive type, were found. These statuettes, as is well 
known, are common in Europe as well as in Asia. The typology of 


them is still unexplained ; but we must notice the very striking resem- 
blance between our statuettes and, on the one hand, those of the 
Aegean Islands, on the other, the clay statuettes of the Laibach moors. 
The Aegean statuettes are certainly pre- Mycenaean, and the Laibach 
figures still belong to the copper age. 

To conclude this rather dry and tiresome analysis I will endeavour 
to estimate the significance of my deductions for the earliest periods 
of the evolution of human civilization. The more we learn of the 
copper age, the more important it is seen to be. This epoch created 
brilliant centres of cultured life all over the world, especially in the 
Orient. To the centres already known, Elamt^lesopotamia, and 
Egypt, we can now add Turkestan and Northern Caucasus — perhaps - 
~ the t^uca^s~aTa~^Tiio1e:^ The "bloom of civilization in the Caucasus 
was by no means a brief one. I have already tried to show that the 
rich development of the bronze age in the Caucasus owed nothing to 
foreign centres. I see no trace of the Mycenaean influence suggested 
by Hoernes ; nor do I see any relation to the bronze age of Western 
Siberia, the Altai, and the Ural Mountains. The Caucasian bronze age 
is very peculiar and very original. The only possible connexion is 
with Mesopotamia and the Asia Minor of the Hittite period. But I 
r^ — 5!o^bT~beneve~that this connexion came abouTifPth~e~usuaI way, by 
influence due to conquest, migration, or commercial intercourse ; 
I think that in all these countries the roots of development lay in a 
great copper age civilization which in each centre arose quite inde- 
pendently and proceeded on different lines, although it presented 
analogous features in all. How to explain the common traits I cannot 
tell. Are we to suppose a common origin somewhere in Asia, or a 
common state of mind which, just as in the palaeolithic and neolithic 
periods, gave rise to the same productions everywhere, quite indepen- 
dent of one another and only slightly influenced by very insignificant 
intercourse ? In any case, the peculiar evolution of Hittite civilization 
cannot be explained without assuming a great centre of copper age 
civilization in Asia Minor as well. As yet we have no monuments 
testifying to the existence of such a centre, but I feel convinced that 
further investigation in Asia Minor will add one or more items to the 
long list of centres of civilization in the copper age. 

A most important centre of such civilization existed, as we have 
seen, on the Kuban, contemporaneous with, and akin to, the other 
centres of the same epoch in Wearer Asia and in Egypt. Do we know 
anything of the people which produced this culture ? The inhabitants, 
autochthonous as we have every reason to believe, of the region 
adjacent to the Sea of Azov are described by the Greeks as forming a 



single nationality. The Greeks knew them by the generic title of 
Maeotians, derived from^Iaeods^heancient name of the Sea of Azov, 
Two Maeotian tribes are often'rnttiHoh'e^as^crstroiiigesrand most 
numerous : thejljauroma tians in the delta of the Don, and the Sindians 
onJboltL chores f^~IEe3traits~of" Kerch t the CimmemrTT^osp horus . 
These tribes captivated the imagination oOhc Greeks by one of the 
peculiarities of their social structure : the part played by women in 

military and political life. Female sovereigns, f emale warriors_a mong 

^-the^B^u xomatian s were a com mo nplace in Greek ethnographic litera- 
ture from the earliest times. The same feature, we learn, characterized 
the Maeotians and the Sindians : remember the romantic story of 
Tirgatao reported by Polyaeous. Owing to the gyna ecocracy which 
prevailed among the dwellers by the Sea of Azov, the semi -historical 
legend of the Amazons came to be localized on the shores of that sea. 
These female warriors, according to Herodotus, migrated to the 
steppes near the Sea of Azov after their defeat by the Greeks in their 
original home, Themiscyra, on the northern shore of the Euxine. 
Landing close to the Sea of Azov, they came to blows with the 
Scythians and ended by marrying the youth of Scythia and forming 
the se mt-Sc ythian SaurornatJan State. The legend is undoubtedly 

"" aetiological, but it bears witness to historical facts : to constant 
relations by sea between the straits of Kerch and the southern shore 
of the Euxine ; to a fierce struggle between the Maeotian peoples and 
the Scythian conquerors, terminating not in a complete Scythian 

^vic tory but i n compromise and in ter marriage j to the co-existence of 
tworaciaTeTements on the shore ot the Seaof Azov, and to strong 
Scythian influence on the Sauromatians. Let us remember, before 
going further, that the Sauromatians, who were_ Maeoti ans, are not 
to be confounded with the Sarmatians,who do not appear on the Don 
until about the fourth century, and who were ai L_Iranian people , 
patriarchal and not matriarchal. 

The matriarchal life of the dwellers by the Sea of Azov was closely 
connected with their religious beliefs. Their chief divinity was the 
Mother Goddess. In the historic period, the peninsula of Taman was 
covered with sanctuaries of this deity, whom the Greeks identified 
with their Artemis, their Aphrodite, their Demeter. The organization 
of the sanctuaries was the same as in Asia Minor. In the sanctuary 
nea HPhanagtjriat here was a legend attached to the temple : Herakles 
was~iatd to have~come hither in his contest with the Giants : the 
goddess concealed him in a cave, and delivered the Giants to him 
one by one. No doubt both Herakles and the Giants had been 
overcome by the attractions of the goddess, who thus resembles the 


Supreme Goddess of the banks of the Dnieper, the mother of the 
mythical Scythian chiefs. She appears, therefore, to have been a 
Mother Goddess, goddess of the productive forces of Nature, like 
the Mother of the Gods and the Potnia Theron of Asia Minor. 

As far as I know, almost all students of the Amazonian legend, led 
astray by the semi -historic character of the story, have been induced 
to explain it by an historical misconception. The beardless Hittites — 
that is the latest explanation — were taken for women and so gave rise 
to the legend. Others consider that the Cimmerians were, so to speak, 
the proto- Amazons. Nothing is less likely. Why not adopt a much 
simpler explanation ? The Amazons are localized wherever there 
was an ancient cult of the Mother Goddess ; w T herever that cult was 
connected, as it regularly was, with a social and political organization of 
matriarchal type ; wherever women were not only mothers and nurses, 
but warriors and chieftains as well. Thc jnatriarchal s tra tum a nd the 
cult of the Mother Goddess are very ancienTin Asia Minor. ihey are 
the ma_rkoiLthe_r>re-Semitic and pre- Indo-European popu la tion -^truf 
^ulocHthonous population, it wecaTe to useThe word. Semites aria* Indo- 
Europeans brought with them patriarchal society and the cult of the 
sup reme God . This cult imposed itself o n that of the Mother Goddess , 
but did not destroy it, least of all in Asia Minor. With the cult of the 
goddess, the Amazons, her w r arrior priestesses, likewise survived. 

Not only the cult of the Mother Goddess, but also the matriarchal 
structure, persisted for a very long time in certain places, especially 
on the shores of the Black Sea — in the immediate neighbourhood of 
the Greeks- among the Sindians, the Maeotians, the Sauromatians, 
and, in the Crimea, among the Taurians, who sacrificed travellers to 
their Parthenos, their virgin goddess. It is quite natural that the 
Greeks, who created the legend of the Amazons on their first contact 
w ith the m at riarchal tribes of Asia Minor, should have made the 
Amazons of Asia Minor emigrate to South Russia and the Caucasus, 
where matriarchy, the cult of the Mother Goddess, and the specific 
ritual of that cult remained in full vigour. 

This somewhat lengthy digression was necessary in order to show 
that the Sauromatians, the Sindians, the Maeotians, and the Taurians 
were really the oldest inhabitants of the Kuban, and that it was prob- 
ably they who created the civilization of the copper age, and who were 
able to infuse it into their conquerors, the Cimmerians, and later the 
Scythians. To show, also, that civilized life never ceased on the banks of 
the Kuban , and that the Maeotian tribes were the element in the popula- 
tion which developed that civilization, under theinfluence of their neigh- 
bours, often their masters, the Cimmerians, the Scythians, the Greeks. 



THE oldest historical allusions, Greek and Assyrian, to South 
Russia belong or refer to the eighth and seventh centuries B.C., and 
tell us of two peoples who played a prominent part at that period, 
and not in the history of South Russia alone : the Cimmerians and the 
Scythians. The Assyrian documents — oracles, lcU ers J _a rid chron ic les _ 
—belong to the reign s of Sargon II. SennachcribT Esarhaddon L and __ 
Ashurbanipal, th at ls,~fo the second TialF^oF die eighth an<T to the 
seventh century, and reveal to us a somewhat troubled period in the 
annals of the two great states in the basin of Euphrates— the Chaldian 
kingdom of Van (Armenia), and Assyria. 

Indo-European tribes were advancing from the east and north to 
the frontiers of these kingdoms. The tribes which are constantly i r 
heing named are the _Oimirrai (Cimmerians) and the Ashgnyai 
(Scythians), the former attacking the Chaldian kingdom from the 
north, the latter pressing forward, step by step, into the eastern 
portions of the Vannic and Assyrian kingdoms. * ^^j 

I cannot dwell long upon the history of these movements. We 
know that the Cimmerians forced their way to the Vannic frontier as 
early as the end of the eighth century ; invaded part of the kingdom, 
which was enfeebled by contests with Sargon II, in the last years of 
the century', after 714 ; and probably succeeded in mingling with the 
Vannic population. At the beginning of the seventh century, when 
Rusas II was king of Van (680-645 B * c -)» an ^ Esarhaddon and Assur- 
banipal of Assyria, the Cimmerians, in alliance with Rusas II and with 
several Indo-European tribes, such as the Medes (Madai), the Man- 
naeans, the Sakerdians, began a fierce struggle with Assyria, There 
is good reason to suppose that this struggle was partly caused by the 
heavy pressure of the Scythians, advancing eastwards in force on the 
Vannic kingdom and its eastern neighbours. The common interest 
of the Scythians and of the Assyrians accounts for the alliance con- 
cluded between Esarhaddon and the Scythian king, Bartatua, which 
was undoubtedly aimed at the allied Chaldians and Cimmerians. r I*he 


defeats which the enemies of Assyria sustained in this conflict, and 
the subsequent advance of the Scythians, forced the Cimmerians, 
about 660, to invade Asia Minor, where they encountered resistance 
from the kingdom of Lydia, assisted by Assyria. Repulsed, the Cim- 
merians renewed their onslaught in 652, and succeeded in destroying 
the Lydian kingdom and pillaging the whole of Eastern Asia Minor. 
A fresh Assyrian attack, and the victorious advance of the Scythians 
about 637, broke the power of the Cimmerians, and reduced their 
kingdom to a fraction of Cappadocia, which remained permanently 
Cimmerian : Cappadocia was always called Gimir by the Armenians. 
It was now T the rum of the Scythians : they carried terror and destruc- 
tion all over Asia Minor, especially the southern and eastern parts, 
which they ruled for twenty- eight years. Some parts of the country 
were occupied by the Scythians permanently : Sakasene and Skythene 
in Armenia were always peopled by Scythian tribes. It was the 
INIedes, and after them the Persians, who put an end to the anarchy 
which these two terrible invasions had caused in Asia Minor, 

Parallel with this Assyrian tradition, which is confirmed by the 
archaeological data mentioned in the first chapter, we have another 
tradition, this time Greek, referring to the same events, not, however, 
from the point of view of Asiatic history, but from that of the Greeks 
who dwelt on the northern shore of the Black Sea. We hear in the 
Odyssey of a people called Cimmerians who lived in a mythical 
country of fog and darkness on the shore of the Euxine, Greek 
mythology always connected the Black Se^_tlie^Euxinej with the, 
_worldjo£^pajted_spirits. The White Island of Achilles, tEe land of 
"tKe Hyperboreans, theTTrimea, were at once real countries and regions 
peopled with the souls of heroes. It is the same in the Odyssey, 
although th^ writer of the passage may well have heard of real Cim- 
merians inhabiting the northern shore of the Black Sea. A little later, 
Greek historic tradition incorporated in its historical and geographical 
treatises distant memories of the events which took place in the Asia 
of the seventh century B.C. I mean the traditions which tell the story 
of the world empires of Ninus and Scsostris. Many attempts have 
been made to reconcile these historic legends with the established 
facts of Mesopotamian and Egyptian history. For my own part, 
I believe that the legends do reflect historical tendencies in these 
countries, but that it is very difficult to assign them to a definite 
period. Had I to choose among more or less probable hypotheses, 
my choice would fall on the period in which the last Assyrian and 
Egyptian dynasties, having repulsed the Scythian attacks, were 
anxious to justify, by means of such legends, their aspirations to that 


universal dominion which was crumbling under Iranian assaults : 
at that epoch, I should conjecture, the legends were transmitted from 
east to west and became part of Greek historical tradition. 

More important, and nearer to the truth, is the Greek tradition 
which tells the story of the conquest of South Russia by the Scythians 
and of their struggles with the Cimmerians. It may be supposed to 
have grown up from the sixth century onwards in the Greek colonies 
on the shores of the Black Sea, and to have been based on ancient 
local tradition. 

Some echoes of this tradition have been preserved by Herodotus 
and by Strabo, who tell us of a great Cimmerian kingdom by the 
Black Sea, occupying the northern shore of the Black Sea, with 
its nucleus on both shores of the straits of Kerch. Aeschylus, 
Herodotus, and Strabo give the names of several localities, situated 
in what was later the kingdom of the Bosphorus, which were closely 
connected with the Cimmerians : the straits of Kerch were invariably 
known, in Greek tradition, as the Cimmerian Bosphorus ; a part of 
the straits, near Panticapaeum, was called the ferry of the Cimmerians ; 
a number of fortified places on the straits were called the Cimmerian 
forts ; the whole country is described by Herodotus as the Cimmerian 
land, especially the northern part of the Taman peninsula, which is 
separated from the rest of the peninsula by an earth wall which was 
believed to be Cimmerian ; finally, there were two towns, on the banks 
of the straits, which bore the name of Kimmerikon or Kimmerie. 

Erwin Rohde wished to explain these reminiscences as due to the 
archaizing tendency of the kings of the Bosphorus, anxious to connect 
their kingdom with Homeric legend. It cannot be denied that the 
tyrants and the peoples of the Bosphorus had a kind of romantic 
tenderness for the traditions which linked the kingdom with the 
Amazons, the Arimaspians, and the Cimmerians. One has only to 
think of the hundreds of vases in the so-called Kerch style, belonging 
to the decadent period of red-figured vase-painting, with representa- 
tions of Amazons fighting with Greeks, of Arimaspians fighting with 
griffins. But this by no means implies that all these traditions were 
invented by the tyrants of the Bosphorus. The rulers and their 
subjects merely laid hold of a tradition which already existed and had 
often been repeated, and perpetuated it in their art and in their 
literature. Lite the legends of Amazons and Arimaspians, the geo- 
graphical names which recall the Cimmerians unquestionably go back 
to the sixth or the seventh century, and at that period we have no right 
to suppose that the earliest Greek colonists were archaistically minded, 
or that they regarded the Cimmerians with particular warmth. There 


is no doubt that when the colonists arrived they found strong and 
actual traces of the Cimmerians in their new home. 

Herodotus, who probably used an earlier literary source, very 
likely Hecataeus of Miletus, was able to tell the story of the last 
moments of the Cimmerian kingdom. The Scythians expelled them, 
vanquished them, and pursued them along the shores of the Black 
Sea and into Asia Minor. Herodotus' account, though mingled with 
much legendary matter, is possible and probable. We have already 
spoken of the Scythian advance in the Assyrian East. It may well 
have been part of a general advance of Scythian tribes mixed with 
Mongolians, moving simultaneously along both shores of the Caspian 
Sea : one body passing north of the Caspian and pouring into South 
Russia, the other coming from the South Caspian littoral and making 
for the Vannlc kingdom and the Assyrian empire. 

Was it this advance that drove the Cimmerians to the Caucasus 
and the kingdom of Van ? Not necessarily. The constant intercourse 
between the Crimea and Northern Caucasus, and between the 
Crimea and Transcaucasia — the kingdom of Van — an intercourse 
which is attested by the archaeological data cited in our second 
chapter, would lead us to suppose that the southward and westward 
movement of the Cimmerian tribes began long before the Scythian 
advance. By their distant expeditions and conquests, the Cimmerians 
probably enfeebled their centre on the shore or the Black Sea, so that 
the Scythians were able to split the Cimmerian kingdom in two, and 
to weaken and destroy, one after the other, the detached wings, after 
cutting off the advanced bodies of Cimmerians, southward and west- 
ward, From their head-quarters, the Cimmerian Bosphorus. My reason 
for preferring this hypothesis to the Herodotean version is the fact, 
vouched for by the Assyrian sources, that a Cimmerian movement 
on the Vannic kingdom took place a long time before the advance of 
the Scythians : the Cimmerians appear in Asia about the second half 
of the eighth century, whereas the Scythians do not figure in Assyrian 
monuments until the time of Esarhaddon. This view is corroborated 
by Strabo, who mentions a Cimmerian invasion of Asia Minor by 
way of Thrace and the Dardanelles, which presupposes a branch 
of the Cimmerian people established near the mouths of the Dnieper 
and expelled from that region by the Scythians : this branch was also 
known to the authority used by Herodotus : its existence bears 
witness to the wide expansion of the Cimmerian empire. However 
this may be, it is certain that the Scythians occupied the entire region 
which had previously belonged to the Cimmerians in the Russian 
steppes. But I doubt if they succeeded in dislodging the Cimmerians 


from the Taman peninsula, any more than in conquering the Crimean 1 . 
highlands, which were peopled by the Taurians, There is a very 
obscure tradition, often repeated by Greek writers, of a fierce struggle 
between the Scythians and the Maeotians, especially the Sindians, 
on both shores of the Cimmerian Bos prior us and on the shores of the 
Sea of Azov. The legend of the origin of the Sauromatians t mentioned 
in my second chapter, and another, reported by Herodotus, of a pro- 
longed conflict between the Scythians and opponents who according 
to Herodotus were the sons of Scythian women by slaves, according 
to other very ancient authorities, Sindians, suggest that the Scythians 
were unable to penetrate into the Taman peninsula, which is protected 
by marshes on one side and by the Cimmerian Bosphorus on the other. 
They even tried to cross the straits in winter, but probably without 
success. The Cimmerians and Sindians managed to organize resis- 
tance and to preserve their independence. 

To judge from the testimony quoted above, the Cimmerians 
remained sufficiently long on tine shores of the Black Sea to leave " 
numerous vestiges behind them when they were expelled. Unhappily 
we have no evidence, either as to the time of their first appearance in 
South Russia, or as to the length of their stay. Were they descendants 
of the autochthonous inhabitants who made the graves with contracted 
skeletons ; or conquerors from the north, the west, or the east ? The 
question is as difficult as that of their nationality. Certain indications 
would lead us to recognize in the Cimmerians one or more peoples of 
Indo-Eu ropean , probably Thracian , origin . Strabo, in a passage which 
has often been quoted, identifies them with the Trerians, who were 
certainly Thracians. Others, on the strength of royal names like 
Teuspa, which seem to be Iranian, have argued in favour of their 
Iranian extraction. I prefer the former hypothesis, and for the 
following reasons. In the Aasyn an references, a nd in suc h passages 
of GrejK_writers as go back to good sources, the Cimmerians - are - 
never confused with the Scythians. On the other hand, certain facts 
can only be explained by a Thracian origin : first, the presence of 
numerous Thracian names, side by side with Iranian ones, among the 
inhabitants of Tanais in the Roman period ; secondly, the existence, 
hitherto unexplained, of a dynasty of kings with Thracian names 
ruling in the Cimmerian Bosphorus and in the Taman peninsula 
from the fifth century B.C. I can only account for these facts if 
there was a strong Thracian element in the population of the Greek 
towns in the state of the Bosphorus, and especially among the 
governing classes. I would say the same of the reigning famines 
among the Sindians in the Taman peninsula. 


Unhappily, we have no archaeological data to verify these hypo- 
theses ? have every reason to befieve that two seventh-century 
SSS-one discovered in the interior of the Taman peninsula the 
ShefneaV Kerch on a hill called Temfr Gora-belong to the .nd.- 
Sous Population, to the native aristocracy of ^Crnmenans mixed 
with Sindians. My supposition is confirmed by the very peculiar 
Teapons found in the former of the two graves, especially the bronze 
bfXaxe and by the openwork belt-clasp, with two lions in a heraldic 
aSe from the same tomb (pi. V, .. a, 4 ) : both f« and clasp are 
ou e afferent from the objects typical of s.xth-century 
erav^s and the clasp recalls the heraldic figures on the pole-heads 
of clppadocia- another refuge of the Cimmerians (see pi. II and 
n V*). A bronze statuette o? a gaUoping horseman with a quiver, in 
a "stvle recalling the Cappadocian bronzes, may represent a native 
horseman a Sfaeoto-Cimmcrian chief of the region of the Kuban 
(pi V 5)- Finally, I am inclined to recogmzc Cmmenans or Sind.ans 
in the opponents of the Scythians on the Solokha gorytus W-** 1 )- 
There °sTstrong contrast between the tall handsome figures of these 
two warriors, apparently victorious, and the Scythian horseman and 
foot-Ildiers with their half- Mongolian faces, who bear the same 
weapons as are always found in graves Ihc • ™«P™» ° 
the Victorious foot-soldiers resemble those from the Tainan grave . 
the principal piece is a battle-axe of bronze or iron. 

I should also like to draw attention to a curious and interesting 
find from Bessarabia, published by Ernst von Stem It bdongs to 
the late bronze age, consists of personal ornaments m dionte, in silver 
infaid with gold, arid in bronze/and recalls finds of the same class and 
period from Hungary and from Troy. 

^ I would also mention the famous treasure of Mikhalkovo and the 
Daljy fibula which is closely akin to it. Hadacaek ^o Pi*tahri« 
minute study of the Mikhalkovo find, proposed^ think with good 
reason-to connect it with the Cimmerians The objects From 
Mikhalkovo and Daljy are decorated in a mixed style, at once 
and eeometric. The Mikhalkovo animal style is very different from 
the Scythian animal style, and reminds one of the objects found at 
Koban in the Caucasus and of Transcaucasian pottery, which are 
known to belong to the end of the bronze age and to the early iron 
a«, just the period in which we might place the first attempts of the 
Cimmerians to cross the Caucasian mountains and establish them- 
selves in Transcaucasia. There is a rather strange object in the 
British Museum which is perhaps connected with the objects from 
Mkhalkovo : a bronze ecltof highly developed form, decorated wth 



VII Cent b.c. Hermitage, Petrograd 


Hermitage, Petrograd 



geometric ornaments, and with a figure of a goat or deer, engraved in 
a style which resembles that of Mikhalkovo and of Koban. It was 
said by the vendor to have come from Kerch. 

All these data, however, are too meagre and too doubtful for 
convincing conclusions. 

It is a curious coincidence that the features of armament and 
costume— bow, spear, and battle-axe— which distinguish the warriors 
whom we have supposed to be Cimmerians, are reported as charac- 
teristic of the Massagetians, whose name recalls that of the Gettans, 
a Thracian people. May we not hazard the hypothesis— a slight 
modification of Franke's theory — that the Cimmerians were a TTira- 
cian people who formed part of the great Indo-European migration : 
the migration taking place in two bodies, one composed of Iranian 
and the other of Thractan peoples ; the Thracians occupying, in the 
course of the migration, the shores of the Black Sea and the region of 
the Danube ? We shall see that the Thracians were always the bitter 
enemies of the Scythians, and that, though driven back by the 
Scythians, they made many efforts to reconquer the steppes of 
South Russia. 

We do not know the exact date of the events and conflicts which 
led to the substitution of Scythians for Cimmerians in the South 
Russian steppes. Herodotus makes these struggles contemporaneous 
with the invasion of Asia by Cimmerians and Scythians. Tnere is no 
objection to this date. If we accept it, we must place the conflict of / 1 
Scythians and Cimmerians in the seventh century. We must notice, / ' 
however, that this period of expansion has left no traces in the archae- 
ology of South Russia. We have no Scy thian_graves pf the s^nt h 
ce ntury: the earliest d at eable Scythian graves belon g to th e sixth. 
The reason is simple. "The seventh century, in South Russia as in 
Asia Minor, was a period of perpetual struggles, and the Scythian 
state, as we know it from Russian tombs and from the description in 
Herodotus, Wj i s not consolidate d until the sixt h century . 

TiiThelsixtFr century, however, the ScytKian kingdom is firmly 
established, and presents all the features of a settled and centralized 
state, although it rested, as we shall see, on a feudal basis. For its 
frontiers we have the account in Herodotus, supplemented by 
archaeological evidence. An important centre, not mentioned by 
Herodotus, was the valley of the, Kuban. The barrows of Kelermes, 
the barrows in the villages of Ulski, Kostromskaya, Voronezhskaya, 
Maryinskaya, Elizavetinskaya, and others, give us a splendid series 
of graves, several of which belong to the sixth century, others to the 
fifth and some to the fourth. Only one later tomb can be attributed 
13a o 



to the Scythians, that of Karagodeuashkh, which dates from the 
second half of the fourth century or the first half of the third : and 
Karagodeuashkh is in the immediate neighbourhood of the Taman 

Scythian graves of the same period as those in the Kuban valley, 
the sixth and fifth centuries B. c, have been found in the level part 
.«#4he^Qrimea (th e Golden Tumulus near Simferripoj) . in the steppes 
betweenDon and Dnieper, close to the Dnieper (Tomak6vka), in the 
district of Poltava (the tumulus of Shumeyko s farm), and near 
Elisavetgrad, between the Dnieper and the Bug (the Melgunov 
tumulus). This suggests that in the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. the 
centre of the Scythian state was not in the neighbourhood of the 
Dnieper, as Herodotus asserts, but farther to the east. Unfortunately, 
the steppes on the western shore of the Sea of Azov, presumably the 
centre of Scythian dominion at this period, have never been explored. 

It is dear, therefore, that the Scythians ruled the whole region of 
the South Russian steppes ; with the probable exception of the mouths 
of the Kuban and the Don, where the Cimmerians and the Maeottans 
held out against their assaults, and the Crimean highlands. But their 
power extended still farther west. We have conclusive evidence that 
in the sixth century there were compact bodies of Scythians dwelling 
in Hungary : this is proved by well-established archaeological finds 
which have often been studied. The date of these finds ts certain, 
the sixth century B.C. They may be compared with the celebrated 
Vettersfelde find, published by Furtwangler and belonging to the 
sixth or fifth century b.c, Vettersfelde, as is well known, is in 
northern Germany, in the old Slavonic country of Lusatia. 

The question arises, whether the Hungarian and Prussian finds 
bear witness to Scythian ascendancy, or only to Scythian expansion, 
in regions so remote from the centre of their power. It will be possible 
to decide this question, w T hen we have more information about the 
tumuli scattered throughout Bulgaria and Rumania. The finds 
hitherto made, of which I shall speak later, point to Scythian ascen- 
dancy in southern Bulgaria and in the Dobrudzha from the fourth 
century onwards. Future excavation will show, whether it was 
confined to that period, or already existed in the sixth century. 

This vast territory was governed by conquerors who formed but 
a minority of the population. It has become customary to speak of 
the whole of South Russia as peopled by Scythian tribes. Nothing 
is farther from the truth. Even the description in Herodotus, who is 
responsible for the habit of applying the name of Scythians to all the 
inhabitants of South Russia, shows us that the Scythians were no more 




thaqajgoup of Iranian tribes, mLxed jjjthMonRo lians and c onstituting ■ , 
the ruling aristocracy. As conquerors and as~a dominant minority, 
the Scythians developed a strictly military organization* resembling 
the military organization of all the nomad peoples who succeeded 
them, the Khazars, the various Mongolian tribes— the Torki, the 
Pechenegi, the Polovtsy— and the Tatars. The military chief was 
the king, who dwelt in an armed camp, surrounded by his army, which 
was always in battle readiness. In time of peace, the king, the 
princes and the cavalry lived on the revenues provided by the con- 
quered regions and on the produce of their herds — horses, oxen, 
cows and sheep. The herds were kept by subjects, whose status 
did not greatly differ from that of slaves. Being nomads— warriors, 
herdsmen and hunters— and desiring to preserve their nomadic 

habits and their nomadic military organization, the Scythian tribes 

chose for their residence the steppes be tween Don and Dnieper, 
which did not lend themselves to agricultural development. Uut 
other portions of their kingdom had been agricultural and remained so: 
the valleys of the Dnieper and its tributaries, the valley of the Bug, 
and part at least of the Kuban valley. These portions, administered 
by governors, who were supported by troop, paid tribute in kind. 
For this purpose the Scythian state was divided into four provinces, 
each province being subdivided into nomcs or districts. We do not 
know what was the relation between these governors or nornarchs 
and the king, but we have every reason to suppose that they were 
so many semi-independent princes, bound to tne central power by 
military and financial ties. 

The creation of a strong and united state in the South Russian 
steppes had momentous consequences. The existence of the Cimme- 
rian kingdom or state had already given rise to commercial intercourse 
between South Russia and the Mediterranean. Apart from the 
constant communication between the southern coast of the Black Sea 
and Asia Minor, which found an echo in the myth, probably Carian 
in origin, of the Argonauts, and which was probably concerned with 
the export of metals, we know that the Carians founded several 
stations on the straits of Kerch and on the Black Sea. They were 
followed by the Teians (Phanagoria), the Clazomenians, and the 
Milesians (Panticapaeum). 'Yhe main object of these establishments 
was to exploit the fisheries of the Sea of Azov and the Cimmerian 
Bosphorus. The natives, who were in perpetual conflict with the 
Scythians, welcomed this colonizing activity, which supplied them 
with fresh, well-armed assistance. From the very first, they were 
strongly influenced by the Greeks. Nowhere do we find more Greek 



pottery of the seventh and sixth centuries than in the Taman peninsula. 
The same causes led to the creation of a fishing colony at the mouth 
of the Dnieper and the Bug ; this colony was Olbia, and it had a 
branch on me island of Berezajru All these coloniesTed a struggling 
existence in the seventh century : in the sixth, they advanced by 
leaps and bounds. Excavation has shown, that the sixth century was 
a period of unequalled prosperity for Panticajpaeurn, Phanagoria, 
Hermonassa, and all the Greek cities 6T~tKe~TainaTr~pe"ni nsu 


well as for Olbia and the cities in ij^rggign mrup mwr |jnippgr_^ 
n * p? nyi -fHi-w apttftis , rfLo ^Hrrtyl^f^plairipfl by the consolidation, 
in the sixth century, of a strong and settled state on the shores of the 
Black Sea. Just as the Greek colonies of Asia Minor, and of the 
southern and western shores of the Black Sea, owed their prosperity 
to the existence of firm governments in their rear, the Lydian and 
the Persian kingdoms, so the development of the Black Sea colonies 
into wealthy and populous cities was due to the formation of the 
Scythian state in the steppes of South Russia. 

The Iranians were always frightened of the sea : they never were 
and never wis hed to become sailors, j ut they were always anxious to 
Be in regular touch with the sea, so as to sell their wares and purchase 
the products, which they prized highly, of Ionian Greece : stuffs, 
jewels, metal for weapons, wine and oil. They gave in exchange the 
goods which they received as tribute from their subjects : com ; leather, 
the product of their stock-rearing ; slaves, raided from neighbouring 
countries ; furs and precious metals, toll levied on the trade with 
north and east. In order to maintain this intercourse, profitable to 
themselves and especially to the kings and the aristocracy, the Scy- 
thians favoured the Greek colonies, left them unmolested, entered 
into personal relations with them, and probably contented themselves 
with levying a nominal tribute as a sign of sovereignty. Neither from 
Herodotus, nor from other sixth or fifth century sources, do we hear 
of any conflict between the Greek colonies and the Scythians. As a 
consequence both parties, the Greeks in the towns, and the Scythian 
aristocracy, grew, as the excavations show, extremely rich. I shall 
return to the subject of the Greek colonies : I now proceed to give 
a brief account of the results of excavation in the Scythian barrows 
of this period. 

Our knowledge of Scythian funerary ceremonial in the sixth and 
fifth centuries b. c, derived from the barrows excavated in the valley 
of the Kuban, corresponds pretty nearly with Herodotus* account of 
the obsequies of Scytnian kings and princes. Herodotus' description 
is as follows : 



The kings are buried in the land of the Gerrhoi. When the king 
dies, they dig agreat square pit. The belly of the corpse is slit, cleared, 
filled with chopped sedge, frankincense, parsley seed and anise, and 
sewn up again , and the body waxed over, and put on a cart, and brought 
to another tribe. The tribesmen do as the Royal Scythians : they lop 
their ears, they shave their hair, they slash their arms, they slit their 
foreheads and noses, they thrust arrows through their left hands. 
Then they convey the corpse in the cart to another tribe : the former 
tribe going with them. When they have gone round all the tribes with 
the corpse, they are in the land of the Gerrhoi, who are the farthest 
of the subject tribes, and the burial ground is reached. There they 
put the body in the grave, on a mattress, and stick spears on either 
side of the corpse, and poles over it, and a roof of mats. In the empty 
part of the grave they bury one of the king*s concubines, whom they 
strangle, and his cupbearer, a cook, a groom, a servant, a messenger, 
horses, and firstlings of all his possessions, and cups of gold : they 
do not use silver or bronze. After this they all make a great mound, 
striving with each other in their eagerness to make it as great as they 
can. A year after, they do something else : they take the best of the 
king's attendants ; the king's attendants are true-born Scythians, 
commanded by the king to serve him, for they have no bought slaves ; 
well, they strangle fifty of them, and his fifty fairest horses, and they 
gut them and clean the belly and fill it with chaff and sew it up. 
Then they set two half-wheels, without the spokes, ends up, each on 
a pair of posts : and make many such frames, and run a stout stake 
through each horse lengthwise from rump to neck and hoist it on to 
the frame, so that the first half-wheel supports the shoulders, and the 
second the belly by the groin, and the legs all hang free. They bridle 
them and bit them, and take the reins forward and fasten them to pegs. 
Then they mount one of the fifty strangled youths on each horse : 
they run a straight stake through the corpse along the spine as far as 
the neck, and the piece of the stake which hangs out below they fasten 
into a socket in the stake which runs through the horse, They set 
these horsemen in a circle about the tomb, and then retire.' 

The excavations have not confirmed every detail of Herodotus' 
account. But they give the same general picture of the funeral of a 
nomad chief, the owner of herds of horses and of immense wealth in 
gold and silver. I will endeavour to give, not a description of a parti- 
cular tumulus, but a general view of the sepulchral ritual as revealed 
by excavation in the Kuban valley, illustrating my account by plans 
of various tumuli (figs. 3~5)- 

Before constructing the grave of a Scythian chieftain, a clearing 

The Tumulus of Kostromskaya 



/■itftf m 

K ^ 




.MB r \ 


Fig. 3. 


was made in the steppes. A trench, often of considerable size, was 
then dug in the virgin soil, with a corridor sloping down to it. Beams 
were placed along the walls of the trench and of the corridor : the 
trench was covered with a conical, and the corridor with a gabled roof. 
The roof of the tomb chamber was also supported by strong beams 
planted in the middle of the trench. The cubical frame of the tomb 
was probably lined with mats and rugs, so as to make an almost exact 

4 :K*L-J^TAlU'R»*>rtl,*0U*? 
Each c# Ttici* posts 


T*jwtort«tt r 

I c f I* 

I 1 aJhi*JtHJHi*ai 

; • HMUBKtlfcJLYIWi, 

MMCMM4iOUEb_>l " 


I ** » «i ■ n Jwxtam 


T*lt»^5FBtQ! ■ 


I 1. 


Fig. 4. 

copy of a nomadic tent. Under the tent, another smaller one was 
sometimes constructed to contain the body of the chief and the 
treasures which were buried with him. In the fourth century, under 
Greek influence, this tent was replaced by a chamber of dressed stone 
with a wooden roof. Round the central tent containing the chief's 
body, other skeletons are nearly always found, sometimes female, but 
usually male, the female richly adorned, the male unadorned but 
furnished with weapons. Round the chamber, on the edge of the 
trench, bodies of horses, sometimes several hundreds, were disposed 
in regular order. In the Ulski tumulus (fig. 4) the bodies of the horses 
were grouped round the pillars of the tent, with wooden structures, 



> $ > ' . * 


TheBurulintheBarrow of 

Fie. s- 

almost certainly horse-stalls, 
beside them. In one of the 
tumuli at EHzavetinskaya (fig. 
5), two chariots were found in 
the corridor leading to the 
trench and to the sepulchral 
tent, each drawn by six horses, 
two abreast. 

The wealth buried with 
the chieftain was sometimes 
enormous. The objects were 
not accumulated haphazard. 
Even in the sixth century, 
there was a regular funerary 
procedure. The chief was 
buried with his richly decor- 
ated panoply ; with sacred 
vases of gold and silver — 
rhyton , phi ale, drinking cups ; 
with a number of copper 
vessels, of a purely Asiatic 
shape, containing meat, and 
with Greek amphorae eontain- 
ing oil and wine ; with women , 
bejewelled, and arrayed in 
festal costume; with armed 
retainers ; with horses, their 
bridles bedizened with gold, 
silver, bone and bronze. Be- 
side the horses , we often find 
bronze rattles crowned with 
heads of animals or birds, 
and a great number of bells. 
The rattles were undoubtedly 
fixed on wooden poles : they 
are very frequently found in 
sets of four, all alike. There 
is every reason to suppose 
that these objects formed part 
of one or more funerary 

From these data we can reconstruct the Scythian funerary cere- 


From Kclcrmes, Kuban. VI Cent. B.C. Hermitage, PetrogracI 



monial : essentially a nomadic ceremonial, cruel , bloody, and luxurious j 
closely resembling injtsjes sential featui-es, the Chin^e_J unerary 
.^ceremonies' of_the_ TTan an d laterjynisties. The grave itself was 
a reproduction of the sumptuous tent in which the dead man had 
dwelt. The body was borne to the sepulchral tent in procession. The 
dead chief, and the persons sacrificed in his honour, clad in festal 
attire and accompanied by the sepulchral furniture, were placed on 
funeral chariots, each drawn by six horses, or on biers carried by 
retainers. Canopies were held above the bodies, attached to poles sur- 
mounted by rattles and covered with bells : if the body was conveyed in 
a chariot, the canopy was set up over the chariot (pi. X, b, d, e). The 
procession was probably preceded by one or more standard-bearers, the 
standards being crowned, like the poles of the canopy, by emblematic 
figures in bronze (pi . X, A, c) . As the horses also wore bells (pi . X, e) , 
the procession made a vast din, intended to drive away the evil 
spirits. When the sepulchral tent was reached, the bodies were laid 
in the grave, with the objects grouped about them ; the horses were 
slaughtered and their corpses disposed around and within the tent ; 
the canopy and the chariot were broken and placed near the tomb, 
sometimes in the corridor. The ceremony over, the grave was covered 
with earth, and a barrow, of imposing height, raised above it. A primi- 
tive, materialistic and superstitious rite, thoroughly nomadic. In 
itself it presents little historical interest. 

But the objects interred with the bodies are extremely interesting, 
and enable us to apprehend the various currents of civilization which 
met in the South Russian steppes. The richest archaic finds were 
made in the barrows of Kelermes on the Kuban, in the barrow exca- 
vated by Melgunov near Elisavetgrad, and at Vettersfelde in the 
south of Prussia. The two former rinds are contemporary and almost 
identical, the third presents some essential differences and belongs to 
a later period, the sixth to the fifth century B.C. I shall begin with 
Kelermes, a find which has never been entirely published. Among 
the rich and varied objects from Kelermes, we can clearly distinguish 
the furniture of one or more male burials and of one or more female. 
What strikes us particularly in these objects is their mixed character. 

Side by side with objects which were undoubtedly imported from 
Asia Minor, and which offer all the characteristic features of sixth 
century Ionian and Aeolian art, such as the engraved silver rhyton 
with Greek mythological subjects, a bronze helmet of pure Greek 
shape, a gold diadem decorated with rosettes and flying birds, we have 
objects the origin of which cannot be determined except by an exhaus- 
tive analysis of their style and their subjects. I refer particularly to 




the gilt silver mirror, engraved with figures of animals in a peculiar 
style, and with a figure of the Great Goddess of Asia, n6ma BypSn/ 
(pi. VI). To the same category belong several articles of uncertain 
use, perhaps belt-clasps, decorated with animals' heads and inlaid 
with amber in a technique which reminds one of cloisonne enamel 
(pi. IX, 2). It might be supposed that these objects were made in 
Persia by artists of Asia Minor, Besides these, we have objects of 
pure Oriental style which were probably made in the Persian kingdom 
during the sixth century B. c, precious specimens of that archaic Persian 
art with which we are but ill acquainted. Characteristic examples are 
two gold vases in a purely Oriental style recalling that of late Assyrian 
objects (pi. VII), and a gold-plated scabbard ornamented with fantastic 
figures of quadrupeds, some of them with fish-shaped wings and 
human foreparts, all drawing bows (pi. VIII, 2). It must be noticed 
that the side- projection of the scabbard is not decorated in the Assyrian 
style, but in another quite different style. The figure is that of a deer, 
lying down or leaping, with heads of eagles forming a border. This 
style, very primitive, and at the same time highly refined, is what is 
called the Scythian animal style: it predominates, though mixed with 
Assyrian motives, in a number of most important objects from the 
Kelermes find. One of them is a battle-axe of iron plated with gold, 
the handle of which is decorated with a series of animals, standing 
or at rest (pi. VIII) : another is a golden lion, which probably 
adorned the breast-piece of a scaled corslet (pi. IX, 1) : there are also 
several gold plaques which were sewn on to garments. The golden 
lion is particularly interesting because of the curious combination of 
the Scythian animal style with amber incrustation in the cloisonne" 
manner mentioned above. Another feature of these objects which 
deserves attention is the simultaneous use of the Scythian animal style 
and of the Assyro-Persian style. In the scabbard the contrast between 
the two styles is very strongly marked : yet it cannot be doubted that 
the different parts of the scabbard were all fashioned by the same 
artist. In the battle-axe the two elements are similarly juxtaposed, 
but here it is the Scythian animal style that predominates. 

The same mixture is observable in the objects found by General 
Melgunov, in the eighteenth century, near Elisavetgrad, and recently 
published by Pridik : they include a scabbard which is almost a replica 
of the scabbard from Kelermes. Remains of a canopy came to light. 
Just as at Maikop in the copper age, the lower ends of the poles which 
supported the canopy were wrought separately in gilt silver : likewise 
the pole-tops, which closely resemble those from Maikop. The tissue 
which covered the canopy was decorated with gold eagles, wings 



VI Cent. B.C. Hermitage, Fetrograd 



displayed. Very characteristic also, the golden tore or diadem, the 
rosettes of which are inlaid with onyx. 

I must also mention another find of this period : the tumulus of 
Shumeyko's farm, in the district of Poltava : it dates from the sixth 
century, as is shown beyond question by a fragment of a black-figured 
vase. The most important object in this find is a dagger, the sheath 
of which is mounted in gold and decorated with embossed figures in 
the Scythian animal style (pi. VIII, 3). Here we must notice the 
combination of embossed work with very delicate granulated work. 
The pieces of bridle-trappings in bone, found in the same tumulus, 
are examples of the pure animal style, with its characteristic predomi- 
nance of birds' heads. 

I shall often have occasion to speak of that Scythian animal style 
which we here encounter for the first time : but I shall mention, before 
going farther, its most characteristic features. I said above that it was 
at once very primitive and highly refined. The main principle is the 
purely ornamental treatment of the animal figure. In the archaic 
specimens which we have before us, there is none of the geometrical 
tendency noticeable in the pottery of Susa, nor any tendency to 
transform the figure of the animal into a vegetable ornament. In 
general, the animals are treated realistically. And the realism is 
vigorous and powerful. But at the same time the animal figure is 
used exclusively as ornament. There is no attempt to form groups 
or scenes : the sole preoccupation of the artist is to decorate the object 
with a number of figures. The only kind of group is the antithetic 
or heraldic. For the sake of ornamental effect, the artist does not 
hesitate to place his animals in attitudes which are sometimes taken 
from nature, but which are immoderately exaggerated and occasionally 
quite fantastic. He allows himself to cut the animal into pieces, and 
to use the head of a bird, for instance, as if it were an ornament. The 
bird's head is often repeated dozens of times, and is employed to form 
friezes and borders. A common practice is to shape the extremities 
of animals as birds 1 heads or griffins* heads. As a general rule, how- 
ever, the artist shows no predilection, as yet, for the fantastic creatures 
of Babylono -Assyrian art : he restricts himself to real animals natura- 
listicaJly rendered. Note that he already employs a polychromatic 
inlaid technique, even for the figures of animals : for example, for 
tie ears of the golden lion from Kelermes ; also in the belt-clasps 
from the same place, and in the diadem from Melgunov's find. 

In the weapons, then, and in the tomb furniture from Kelermes, 
we find Greek objects side by side with Assyrian and with specimens 
of a mixed style which we may call Scytho- Assyrian : on the other 


hand, in the chariot ornaments, in the canopies, and in the horses' 
trappings, the Scythian animal style reigns unopposed. Take the 
pole-tops from the canopies : rattles surmounted by heads of animals 
and birds, strange standards representing a human eye planted in 
the middle of the head of a bird of prey, the surface of the head 
being ornamented with figures of animals and with beaks arid eyes 
of birds (pi. X). There is nothing of the kind in the orient alism of 
Ionian Greece. 

Scythian civilization changes its aspect in the fifth century. Look 
for a moment at the Vettersfelde find, and the others that go with it, 
look at the tumuli of the Seven Brothers in the Kuban valley, and the 
native tumuli in the cemetery of Nymphaeum. The Vettersfelde find 
consists of a dagger-sheath, a pectoral, a horse's frontlet in the form 
of a fish covered with figures of animals, plaques from a bridle, and 
jewels. The shapes of these objects are purely Iranian, the decorative 
principles also — rows of animals one following another, extremities 
transformed into animals' heads, and so forth. But the animals them- 
selves are the work of Greek artists, and exhibit all the peculiarities 
of Ionian animals : the arrangement also betrays the hand of a Greek. 
~--- Jhus we see Ionian craftsmen working for the Scythian mark et , 
executing special orders, and adapting themselves to tKe taste of their - * 

The same tendency is observable in other finds which are closely 
akin to that of Vettersfelde : the tumulus of Tomak6vka on the lower 
Dnieper, and the so-called Golden Tumulus near Simferopol in 
the Crimea. We notice particularly a pronounced taste For poly- 
chromy. "Hie polychromy is obtained by means of coloured enamels 
fastened to the objects in a technique which is the precursor of 
cloisonne enamel. Good examples are the sword -sheaths, almost 
identical in both finds and very like the dagger-sheath from Vetters- 
felde; and the lioness from the Golden Tumulus, which either 
decorated a quiver or was placed on the corslet as a pectoral badge. 
The body of the lioness is covered all over with scales of enamel, 
each scale consisting of a compartment filled with coloured inlay. 

I must also mention a very characteristic find from the Kuban, 
which belongs to the same period : a round openwork clasp or 
phalara of bronze (see fig. 21B in chapter VIII). The frame is 
formed by two lions biting each other's tails, and in the middle there 
is a lioness with head regardant : the whole design is vigorous and 
effective. The motive recurs on a number of bronze plaques from 
the barrows of the Seven Brothers, of which we shall presently speak. 
It is interesting to know that a find resembling that of Kelermes was 



all covered with gold. From Kelermes, Kuban, 

Hermitage, Petiograd 



made in Southern Caucasus, at the village of Zakim in the district of 
Kars. The chief piece is a bronze belt in the same style as the objects 
from Kelermes. We can see one of the routes by which objects of 
the Kelermes type reached Northern Caucasus. 

Extremely important finds have been made in the group of kurgans 
on the Kuban which the inhabitants call the Seven Brothers. Some 
of the graves certainly go back to the fifth century B.C. ; another may 
be later, of the fourth century B.C. Unhappily the objects have 
never been thoroughly studied, although Stephani devoted several 
pages to them in the Reports of the Archaeological Commission. 
Some of the finds are pure Greek : Attic red-figured and black 
varnished vases; silver vases engraved and gilded (pi. XV, 3); bronze 
candelabra ; jewels of exquisite finish, for example, a pair of snake 
bracelets (pi. XV, 1) ; gold plaques sewn on garments; and so forth. 
As far as I can judge, some of these articles were made in Athens, and 
others in Asia Minor. The gold plaques may have been manufactured 
at Panticapaeum, on partly Greek, partly Scythian models. Rut side 
by side with Greek imports, we have Oriental ; such as the silver rhyton 
terminating in the forepart of a wild goat (pi. XII, a), w r hich recalls 
Hittite and Cappadocian works of art. It is exactly analogous to the 
famous handles from Armenia, part of a bronze vase, one of which is 
in the Louvre and the other in the Berlin Museum ; and to certain 
bronze objects, of the same type and the same provenience, now 
in the Louvre, We may per naps assign the same origin to the 
numerous rhyta of gold ana horn, terminating in the foreparts of 
animals, which were placed in the tumuli of the Seven Brothers : we 
still possess the golden portions — the lower ends and the plaques 
which decorated the mouths (pis. XII, B, C, and XIII) : the plaques 
are embossed with figures of beasts and birds of prey, sometimes 
fantastic, devouring goats, deer, or hares. The same style appears 
on the famous silver plaque, the pectoral of a corslet, with figures of 
a deer suckling her young, and, below it, of an eagle with wings 
displayed. We are so unfamiliar with the art of Eastern Asia Minor, 
that it is not easy to Mud convincing analogies : the style, in my 
opinion, is at any rate not Ionian. It must Be noticed that side by 
side with plaques of exquisite work we find others which are unques- 
tionably imitations, influenced by the Scythian animal style. In a 
find which has lately been acquired by the Berlin Museum, and has 
not yet been published, I saw objects which were perfectly analogous 
to the plaques described above. 

The only articles from the tumuli of the Seven Brothers, which 
show the Scythian animal style in a pure form, belonged to bronze 



horse- trappings : prodigious numbers of horses were buried with the 
dead. In these there is a tendency, unknown in the sixth century, to 
transform the animals into palmettes and other floral ornaments (see 
fig. 21, C, F, G, and fig. 22, A, B, E, in chapter VIII). 

I have already stated, that the native graves in the cemetery of 
/. Nymphaeum, the graves of the hellenized Scythians of the Crimea, 
present the same characteristics as the tumuli of the Seven Brothers, 
and belong to the same period, the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. 

The fourth century brings no change on the Kuban, beyond the 
continual growth of Greek influence, which even shows itself in the 
choice of armour : for example, besides the Greek helmets, greaves 
and Greek corslets come into vogue. A fine specimen of a Greek 
breastplate was recently found by Veselovski in a tumulus in the 
village of Elizavetinskaya (pi. XIV) , The head of Medusa which 
decorates it looks archaic, but is merely archaistic, and belongs to the 
end of the first half of the fourth century. We must observe, that at 
the end of the fifth century and the beginning of the fourth strong 
Athenian influence makes itself felt, not only in the style of the jewel- 
lery, but also through steadily increasing importation of Attic pottery. 
The Scythian chieftains had a special liking for the large Panathenaic 
vases with their representations of athletic contests and their majestic 
figures of the warrior goddess Athena. A specimen was found in the 
grave which I have just mentioned, 

*^> But Greek influence was not able to kill the Scythian style, which 
always predominates in horse- trappings. The Scythian style is 
elaborated and developed, but it remains purely Asiatic, It presents 
us with strange combinations of floral and animal motives, the animals 
prevailing. I shall treat the subject at greater length in my eighth 
chapter. The bronze objects in this style were not the work of Greek 
craftsmen : a Greek might lay hold of the forms and accept the 
decorative principle, but he could never create such purely Oriental 
objects as the bridle plaques from the barrows of the Kuban and the 
Crimea. Two currents can be detected : one from the south, from 
Mesopotamia; the other from the north, where in the forests and 
marshes elk and reindeer fought with the famished wolves : all three 
animals were unknown to Greek decorative art. The artists were 
natives, and they are just as likely to have worked in the steppes of 
the Caucasus as in the Greek towns of the Cimmerian Bosphorus. 

To conclude. The Scythian civilization of the fifth and fourth 
centuries B. C^js_jn^ejiiy~^ompiei^^ in t he sixth ce ntury. It 

is an aristocratic civilization of nomadic chiefs, mixed an decomposite. 
Besides the native element, primitive, but elaborate, even refined, 


From Kt-Iermes, Kuban. Hermitage, Petrograd 

From Kclermes, Kuban. Hermitage, Petrograd 


there are two streams of importation and of influence in the sixth 
century : one Oriental, probably coming from Mesopotamia by way 
of the Caucasus, and from Asia Minor through the Greek colonies on 
the southern shore of the Black Sea : the other Greek, coming from 
the Ionian and Aeolian colonies in Asia Minor. The former weakens 
towards the end of the fifth century and then almost disappears, the 
other grows and develops. The Greek artists of Asia Minor begin to 
work for the Scythians, and to consult their taste. But they have only 
a genera] notion of Scythian life : they know the forms of Scythian 
objects, and the Scythian love of the animal style : but the spirit of 
their work remains Ionian. 

The predominance of the Oriental aspect in sixth-century Scythian 
civilization is a fact of capital importance, and one which is generally 
acknowledged. What was the costume of the Scythians of South 
Russia in the sixth century we do not know. But as we are well 
acquainted with their costume in the fourth and third centuries, from 
the representations which I shall quote in the fifth chapter, and as 
this costume is purely Oriental, we may suppose that it had not changed 
since the sixth century. It is the Iranian costume which we know 
from the reliefs of Naksh-i-Rustam and Bisutun (Behistun), and 
from other monuments of Persian art. I shall not discuss it further, 
as the facts are well known and have been studied over and over again. 
As to armour, apart from the bronze helmet and greaves, which were 
borrowed from the Greeks, the panoply of the Kuban barrows is 
Iranian : Iranian the scaled corslet with pectoral bad^e — a kind of 
cunningly wrought bronze shirt : the spear and the javelins ; the 
arrows with bronze heads of the triangular form which spread with 
the Iranians all over the ancient world, beginning in the early iron age; 
the bow of the shape known to the ancients as Scythian and frequently 
described both by ancients and by moderns : the gorytus, quiver and 
bowcase in one, of wood covered with leather or metal, an Iranian 
speciality ; the short iron sword ; the scabbard, with its side-projec- 
tion for the chains or straps by which the sword was suspended from 
the warrior's belt, a type of scabbard convenient for cavalrymen and 
regularly represented in Persian art ; finally, the dagger, often attached 
by straps to the warrior's left leg, again a handy rash ion for cavalry- 
men armed like foot-soldiers. All this is familiar and has often been 
set forth : recently by Minns. 

It is not so generally known, that the horse-trappings, which we 
can reconstruct with the aid of many hundreds of pieces from tombs, 
and particularly the bridle, are of pure Iranian type. The frontlet, 
the ear-guards, the temple-pieces, the pectoral, the plaques which 


studded the straps especially at the intersections, the pendent bells, 
in a word the whole bridle, can only be compared with the horse- 
trappings in Hittite and Assyrian representations. The pieces, and 
the system of adjustment, are the same : and there is the same profu- 
sion of metal on the straps. But there is one important difference : 
the ornaments of Assy nan and Hittite bridles are almost always 
geometric, whereas the Scythian ornaments, with few exceptions, 
show the forms of that pecliliaT jnjrnal style w hich I have already 
described. In my account of Scythian funcrarcustoms, I mentioned 
more than once that the corpse was protected by a canopy, spread over 
the funeral car or carried by retainers, which was supported by four 

Eoles with rattles on the top crowned either by figures of animals or 
y animals' heads. The poles supported a piece of cloth, on which 
gold plaques were probably sewn. Several of the rattles are crowned 
with heads of bulls, mules, or griffins (pi. X, b-d). The use of funeral 

~jf canopies is purely Oriental: we saw it at Maikop, in the copper age, 

and it persisted all over the East. Oriental also the use of poles sur- 
mounted by heads of animals or other emblems : these poles occur in 
all parts of 4h£^J&aJbylonian_worJdj there they signified sceptres or 
standards, and nearly every divinity is accompanied by one. A similar 
emblem was borne in front of the Assyrian ldng_: they were the first 
military standards. So also in Egypf^nri ifTtTra - Hittite emp ire. The 
Scythians were undoubtedly influenced by this Oriental custom. The 
pole- top reproduced on plate X, A probably did not form part of a 
canopy. Its peculiar shape, and its apotropaic decoration, suggest that it 
was a standard , or one of a pair — for two were found — which w T ere 
carried at the head of the funeral procession. The shape of the canopy 
poles was naturally modelled on the standards of the gods or of the 
kings. The heads seem to be primarily apotropaic : the bell is 
certainly so. It is interesting to observe that the same custom appears 
in_^ripadock ; I have already mentioned a number of bronze pole- 
tops from that country in the Louvre and in the British Museum (pi. II): 
the poles themselves were of wood or iron. These pole- tops are 
sometimes in the form of a goat perched on a rattle — a purely Assyrian 
type, which influenced western Siberia : but most of them present 
a stylized figure, or two figures one above the other, of the Great 
Goddess, the Mistress of Beasts. Curiously enough, we find the 
same goddess on a pole-top, belonging to a canopy, from the kurgan 
of Alexandropol, which we shall study in our fifth chapter. The use 
of the Cappadocian pole-tops may have been funerary or ritual : like 
the South Russian examples, they are furnished with rings for straps 
or cords. 


From the Kuban. VI V Cent. h.c. 



Thus costume, armour and funeral outfit of the sixth -century 
Scythians, are all purely Oriental with hardly any Greek influence. 
Oriental also, as we have seen, the style and technique of most of the 
objects found in sixth-century Scythian tombs, I need not dwell 
upon the imported Oriental articles mentioned above : their neo- 
Assyrian and Ponto-Cappadocian style can be recognized at a glance. 
Some of the objects in this style are enriched with amber inlay. They 
need not perplex us. Oriental art, especially Elamitic and Sumerian, 
used inlay at all periods to diversify the surface of statues, metal 
objects and palace walls. It is true that the cloisonne method of inlay 
was not practised till after this period. But we may believe that 

Hors*- trappings from the Southern Cmcasus 
and the Kcqkm of the Kuban. 

Fig. 6. 

cloisonne also was invented somewhere in Babylonia or Assyria, 
Almost the same process was employed for ivory in the neo-Assyrian 
objects from Nimrud, lately published by Hogarth and by Poulsen, 
and similar processes were current in Egypt, from the earliest times, 
for metal objects decorated with precious stones, ITiat the same tech- 
nique continued to be used in Iranian art, may be seen from two great 
finds of Iranianobjects, both belonging to the fourth century B. c. : the 
treasure "If om ^Turkestan in the British Museum, published with a 
commentary by DalfonTand the Susa find published by de Morgan 
and now in the Louvre. These two finds offer striking analogies with 
the jewel lery from t he Kuban, and give undoubted prooToT common 
origin. With the rnlaitT objects I should connect a group of metal 
articles, chiefly of bronze and of silver, which belong to Scythian 
horse-trappings of the archaic period : openwork roundels attached to 

•353 * 


a metal disk, the hollow parts filled with some black substance (fig. 6). 
This technique also is purely Oriental ; parallels are to be found both 
in Babylonia and Assyria and in Egypt. It is particularly interesting 
to note, that the same processes were used for similar objects in Trans- 
caucasia at the end of the bronze and at the beginning of the iron age : 
we have many tombs from this period, thanks to the excavations of 
Belck, Roessler, Ivanovski and others, and some of them are astonish- 
ingly rich : in nearly every tomb we find roundels like those of the 
Kuban, and openwork pendants, often in the form of birds or animals, 
the cavities filled with black inlay. The same technique was in 
frequent use for sword-hilts and other articles. We may be sure that 
in this matter Transcaucasia acted as the intermediary between the 
Euphrates valley and Northern Caucasus. We must avoid, however, 
the common error of attributing the Transcaucasian tombs to the 
Chaldian kingdom of Van. That kingdom, as far as we know, is 
subsequent to the prehistoric civilization of Transcaucasia ; it adopted, 
with only slight modification, the culture of Assyria. 

It is more difficult to class the animal style of objects from the 
sixth-century Scythian tombs, both in the Kuban and elsewhere. It 
evidently presents distinctive and very primitive features. We shall 
discuss the question later ; but it should be observed that several 
of these features reappear in Asiatic art. I would mention certain 
Hittite figures among the Sinjirli sculptures, the tails of which 
end in birds* heads. For the animals with reverted heads — a con- 
venient attitude for filling a given space, particularly a circular one — 
I will quote, in addition to the examples mentioned by Reinach in 
his paper on the flying gallop, the Assyro-Chaldaean weight found 
at Susa, in the form of a recumbent wild ass, a form w T hich frequently 
recurs on gold plaques and bridle ornaments from South Russia, 
especially during the archaic period. Iranian antecedents can be 
found for the custom of representing animals with their foreparts 
turned in one direction and their hind-quarters in the other, as on the 
sword-sheath found near the mouth of the Don, and in several figures, 
from horse-trappings, found on the Kuban : the motive occurs later 
in a great number of objects from prehistoric and Sarmatian Siberia. 
An example is the axe from Hamadan in Persia, now in the British 
Museum (pi. XI, b) : it belongs to a whole series of Persian axes, 
decorated in the animal style, which are connected by their shape and 
ornamentation with a group of axes from protohistoric Elam, from 
Babylon and from Assyria. The British Museum axe has its back 
part in the form of a Persian lion-headed griffin, winged and horned, 
with its head reverted : the motive appears as early as Babylonian 






British Museum 


times on cylinders representing a hero fighting with a lion. The 
whole series bears a conspicuous resemblance to the objects found in 
the tumuli of the Kuban. The treatment of the animals is the same 
as in the heads and figures on the pole-tops of South Russia. Curi- 
ously enough, on an axe from Khinaman near Kirman in south-western 
Persia, close to the frontier of Baluchistan, we find the apotropaic eye 
which forms the principal decoration of the archaic standard, alreaay 
mentioned , from the Kuban (pi. XI, e). The most remarkable specimen 
of this Iranian series, and the one which offers the most striking analogy 
with kindred objects from South Russia, is the axe from Bactria, of 
bronze inlaid with silver, recently published by Sir Hercules Read : a 
symplegma of three animals, a lion fighting with a boar and trampling 
on a wild goat (pi, XI, a). Apart from the technique of inlay, derived 
from the process current in Sumerian Babylon, I must draw attention 
to the combination of three animals in one group, a motive which was 
taken up by South Russian as well as by Ionian art, and to the reverted 
heads of the lion and the goat, the prototype cf that antithetic arrange- 
ment of the animal body which I mentioned above. I reserve a more 
detailed discussion of the Scythian animal style for my eighth 
chapter : but I was obliged, before proceeding farther, to point out 
that this style, albeit very distinctive and very original, only established 
itself in South Russia after a long period of contact with Assyro- 
Persian art, during which it was subjected to very powerful influence 
from that quarter, leading to the amalgamation of motives from both 
styles which we notice at Kelermes, in the battle-axe and in the lion 
pectoral with amber inlay. 

The Oriental aspect of Scythian civilization in the sixth and fifth 
centuries could be demonstrated by means of other parallels, and 
may be taken as proven. We are justified in affirming that Scythian 
art, at the outset, was a branch of that mixed Iranian art of which 
hitherto we knew only the Persian branch. The ■Scythian-hranclL- 
presents itselfon the one Jiand as a development of motives inherited 
Dy^Traruan art_tonohe_j>owej ffi^ andL 

Elam, and on the other as an attempt to combine that art with another, 
ruder and more primitive, the origin of which is as yet unknown. 
From the fif th_ cen tury onwards Scythian, art, like^Persian, was 
influenced, more and moreslrongtyTby the Greek art of Ionia. This 
influence was brought about exclusively by continuous intercourse 
between the Greek and the Scythian world. The intermediaries were 
the Greek colonies, especially the towns of the Bosphoran kingdom. 
The subject will be treated at length in the succeeding chapter. 

One remark in conclusion. In a general work like the present 



I cannot dwell in detail on the hotly disputed problem of Scythian 
nationality. It will have been gathered from the preceding pages, 
that I believe the Scythians to have been Iranians, although lately 
several high authorities, such as Geza Nagy, Minns and Treidler, 
have revived the Mongolian or Turanian theory, which seemed to 
have been completely disposed of by the judicious observations of 
Schiefner, Zeuss, Gutschmid, MiillenhofT and Tomaschek. It |is 
difficult to insist on either hypothesis : decisive proofs are lacking 
on both sides. It has been thought that a conclusive argument in 
favour of the Iranian theory was furnished by the Iranian names of 
native or semi-native citizens of Pantica paeum> Tanai sand Olbia. 
But it is forgotten that these names"r3eIong to the Roman~pmoli7~iSnd 
bear witness to Sarmatian, not Scythian infiltration into the Greek 
cities. Stress has also been laid on the Mongolian physiognomy of 
the Scythians as represented on Bosphoran monuments of the fourth 
and third centuries B.C. But it must be borne in mind that the 
monuments give two ethnographical types : one ^ongolian^ as in 
the gorytus from Solokha, thjLotheiiXndo-Eurapean, as in most of the 
other monuments. In spite of this I entirely agree with those who 
believe the Scythians to have been of Iranian extraction, although 
I readily admit a strong infusion of Mongolian and Turanian blood. 
My reasons are mainly based on historical, archaeological, and religious 
considerations, since the study of the language does not provide 
decisive criteria. Our information about the Ashguzai, who are the 
same as the Scythians, and about the Sacians ; their close affinity with 
the Sarmatians, whose Iranian nationality is not disputed ; and the 
evidence of Herodotus, confirmed by archaeology, as to the religion 
Q of the Pontic Scythians, a matter which we shall discuss later ; leave 
no doubt that the Scythian tribes of South Russia were Iranians, 
nearly akin to the Medea and Persians, but belonging to another 
branch of the stock. It is well known that the linguistic evidence, 
founded on the few Scythian words transmitted to us by the Greeks, 
is in no way opposed to this hypothesis. But sufficient emphasis has 
not been laid on the archaeological evidence, which seems to me almost 
decisive. We have seen that very ancient monuments, which we 
have every reason for assigning to the Scythians, can only be explained 
by Iranian parallels ; and that it is impossible to define the general 
character of Scythian art, except by connecting it with Persian art of 
the same period. 




I HAVE already spoken of the very ancient relations between the 
mining districts on the shores of the Black Sea and the peoples of 
Asia Minor and doubtless of Greece as well. These relations probably 
date from the same time as the first appearance of iron in what was 
later the Hellenic world. I have quoted the very old Greek legends 
as to the origin of iron. Iron and iron weapons were thought to have 
been the invention of the Chalybians and the Scythians. I am 
convinced that it was the export of metals from the south-eastern 
comer of the Black Sea which gave rise to the prehellenic, probably 
Carian, legend of the Argonautic expedition. The Milesian version 
of the story gave poetic expression to the half-military, half -commercial 
enterprises of the Carians and other peoples of Asia Minor, sea-raids 
organized by pirates and intrepid corsairs, always in quest of unknown 

It is somewhere about the yea r rooo B.C. that we must date two 
groups of events : the development of the mining industry on the 
southern shores of the Black S ea, and_the first expeditions of Aehaeans 
and Carians in search o f iron and of gold. T his date is corroborated by 
a fact which KalTnot hitherto been explained : the complete absence, 
beyond the straits of the Bosphorus, of that Aegean or Mycenaean 
influence which is so strong, for example, at Troy. The Cretans of 
the Minoan epoch, and the Myceneans of the time of Agamemnon, 
did not frequent the shores of the Black Sea : they had nothing to 
take them there : all their efforts were directed westwards. With the 
object of procuring an abundant supply of good iron weapons, the 
heirs of Mycenaean sea-power ventured into the distant Black Sea 
regions, and opened up the route, later so popular, which led from 
the Mediterranean, through the straits and along the southern coast 
of the Black Sea, to the banks of the Thermodon and of the Phasis. 

The adventurers from Asia Minor soon recognized, that the Black 
Sea was not only rich in metals, but inexhaustibly rich in fish, and, 
more important still, that the dwellers on its shores were not ferocious 


barbarians but fairly civilised people, who had a taste for the products 
of Asia Minor and were ready to trade. Accordingly they began to 
found fishing stations on the snores of the Black Sea, advancing slowly, 
step by step, until they finally reached the heart of the fishing district : 
the straits of the Bosphorus, and the shores of the Sea of Azov, on the 
one hand ; and, on the other, the mouths of the great Russian rivers. 
The routes, once open, were never abandoned. The Ionians were 
the first to follow the example of the Carians, as we can see from the 
written record. We do not Know the Carian version of the Argonautic 
myth : but we do know the Ionian or Milesian version, which existed 
as a separate poem and was also incorporated into the story of the 
hero-mariner Ulysses. I agree with Vvilamowitz and Friedlander in 
believing that the tcnth^eleventh and twelfth book s of our Ody ssey 
are a reflection of the voyages oTTVlitesi an Tracers and privateers in the 
Pontus, and that it was the Ionians who compounded" that curious 
medley of Greek myths from various sources, of Ionian sailors' reports, 
and of those ancient religious and mythical ideas which saw, in the 
Pontic region and its inhabitants, the world beyond the grave and the 
souls tif departed heroes. I cannot give more than a brief indication of 
the views which I hold on the numerous difficult and complicated prob- 
lems suggested by the myth of the Argonauts and the later portion of 
the Odyssey : I hope to retum to them in a special article. But I must 
insist on the high probability of the theory, pretty generally accepted in 
the most recent works on the subject, that the adventures of Jason, and 

Fart of the adventures of Ulysses, are to be localized in the Black Sea. 
do not feel certain that we can go as far as Bacr, and lately Maass, 
who identify the harbour of the Laestrygons with Bafaklava, and the 
island of Circe with the Taman peninsula : but 1 am persuaded that 
the land of the rising sun, the Aia of the Odyssey, which seems, at the 
same time, to be part of the world beyond the grave, is to be placed 
on the Caucasian bank of the Black Sea. However this may be, it is 
evident that the only route known to the oldest Ionian navigators was 
the southern, the same which was used by their predecessors. It is 
not surprising, that the earliest Ionian stations on this route were at 
the two places where native centres had long existed : Sinope and 
Trebizond. Trebizond has always been the best port for the trans- 
mission of iron and copper from the Transcaucasian mines, and the 
terminus of the two great trade routes from south and east. Sinope, 
as Sir Walter Leaf has recently shown, was the point at which goods 
brought from Trebizond, on the light vessels which are the only craft 
plying on that part of the coast, were transferred to big sea-going ships, 
the Ionian merchantmen. It may be that the Ionians did not stop at 


ON THE KUBAN. V Cent :c. Hermitage, Pctrograd 


Trebizond, but moved along the east coast of the Black Sea as far as 
the straits of Kerch. We may conjecture that Phanagoria, Hermonassa, 
and other colonies founded by Teos, Mytilene, and Clazomenai, were 
pre- Milesian foundations, previous to the hegemony of Miletus in 
the Black Sea. 

But the southern route was neither safe nor convenient. There 
are no harbours between Batum and Noyorossisk^ (Bata), and the 
coast teemed with pirates who detested their Greek competitors. It 
was not only from religious motives that shipwrecked foreigners were 
sacrificed on the coast of the Crimea. Nor was the coast between 
Si nope and Treblzond a very hospitable one, to judge from the stories 
told by Xenophon and by Arrian. 

But there were two other routes, one lengthy but commodious, 
the other shorter. The first ran right along the northern shore of the 
Black Sea. Nearly every station on mis route held out the promise of 
easy profits and miraculous draughts of fishes. In the course of the 
eighth and seventh centuries, the mouths of the great fishing rivers 
on this route, the Danube, the Dniester, the Bug, the Dnieper, were 
occupied, one after another, by Milesian fishing colonies. I shall not 
speak of the Danubian colonies : I shall mention only the two great 
ports, Tyras of the Dniester and Olbia of the Bug and the Dnieper, 
Doth at the outset, as may be seen from their coins , almost exclusively 
fishing stations. A fishing village has been discovered on the island 
of Berezan near Olbia, full of vases and vase fragments belonging to 
the seventh and sixth centuries B. C. We may be sure that the village 
was closely connected with the town of Olbia, which was founded, 
about the same time, at the mouth of Bug and Dnieper : the village 
may even be older than Olbia, 

The other route was merely a modification of the southern route. 
Instead of keeping to the perilous coast of the Caucasus, ships leaving 
the great ports on the southern shore, Amjsos , Sinope, and Heraele ia^ 
could cross the Black Sea and head stfatghf For the Crimean coast, 
from which the coast of Asia was visible in clear weather. On the 
Crimean coast, an excellent harbour, Chersonesus, received the 
mariners in perfect safety. It can easily be understood that the Ionian 
sailors lost no time in seizing this harbour and founding a seaport. 
It is now known that the city of Chersonesus was not originally a 
Dorian colony from Heracleia. Archaeological evidence — several 
finds of sixth-century Ionian vases — suggests that, like the other 
Black Sea colonies, it was founded by Ionian s in the_si xth cent ury J __ 
to be refounded by Heracleotes in trie fifth century when Miletus 
was no longer able to maintain her maritime supremacy in the Black 


Sea. Chersonesus was only a stepping-stone r the little town produced 
nothing, the fishing was poor, and the neighbouring Taurians had 
nothing to sell. But it was a convenient stepping-stone on the direct 
route, along the Crimean coast, to the straits of Kerch and to the 
Sea of Azov with its wondrous store of fish. A day or two*s sailing 
along the inhospitable coast of southern Crimea, infested with pirates : 
then, after these anxious hours, the port of Theodosia, another 
Milesian foundation, as Ernst von Stern has shown : next, the fine 
port of Nymphaeum, where the fishing was already plentiful : and so 
to Panticapaeum, an ancient centre or commerce and of civilization, 
one of the capitals of the former Cimmerian kingdom, and an excel- 
lent port, especially for sailing-vessels. To reach the opposite coast, 
probably already studded with Greek stations, there was only a 
strait to cross. Thus the two groups of Black Sea colonies were 
already established : the numerous eastern group, closely connected 
with the Caucasus and the southern ports or the Black Sea : and the 
western, connected less closely with these than with the Greek colonies 
on the western littoral of the Black Sea. The Milesians soon found 
means to join the two groups. By skirting the north coast of the 
Black Sea and the west coast of the Crimea, it was possible to reach 
the port of Kerkinitis, from which Chersonesus could easily be made. 
But the voyage was long and perilous, and ships preferred to cross 
direct from the northern coast of Asia Minor to the southern coast 
of the Crimea. 

It can easily be seen that the ascendancy in the western group 
belonged to Olbia. The estuary of Olbia was a calm and spacious 
lake : ships coming from the Dnieper and the Bug could sail there 
at their ease. Moreover, big ships could find all they required at 
Olbia. The Dnieper and the Bug abounded in fish : and the agri- 
cultural population of the lower and middle basins was glad to sell its 
goods to Greek merchants. Finally, the Dnieper and the Bug were 
always great trade routes joining north with south and bringing 
southward the produce of the north : furs and slaves, perhaps also 
amber. The relations of Olbia with north and east are proved by 
finds in the Kama region. The so-called Ananyino civilization, 
which belongs to the early iron age (sixth to fifth century B. a), is full 
of Olbian influences. 

The peaceful development of the country was facilitated by the 
foundation and consolidation of the great Scythian empire. We have 
seen that from the sixth century onwards, prosperity prevailed among 
the Scythians and their subject tribes. In Olbia also, the tributary of 
the Scythian kings, who, as we know from Herodotus, maintained 



Hermitage, Petrogract 


the most cordial relations with the great Greek trading centre. We 
may recall the Olbian legends of Anaeharsis, the wise Scythian , and 
of King Skyles, who married a Greek wife, paid frequent visits to 
Olbia, and perished on account of his excessive philhellenism. The 
excavations of Farmakovski in the archaic cemetery of Olbia, and those 
of Skadovski and von Stern at Berezan, bear witness to the prosperity 
of Olbia in the sixth century and to its connexions with almost the 
whole Greek world. Some of the Olbian tombs were veritable 
treasure houses of pottery and, even more, of Greek jewellery. The 
character of the jewellery is purely Ionian. 

We can understand how Olbia, protected by the Peace of Scythia, 
was able to heilenize a number 01 villages on the lower course of 
the Dnieper and the Bug, and to send Greek colonists who mingled 
with the natives and formed a mixed population, the Mixellenes of 
Herodotus. The mixed civilization of these villages is known to us 
from the productive excavations of Goshkevich and of Ebert. 

The conditions which prevailed in the eastern group of colonies 
were much more complex. It will be remembered that the inhabi- 
tants of the Taman peninsula and the east coast of the Sea of Azov, 
the Sindians and the Maeotians, possessed a powerful and ancient 
civilisation, that the straits of Keren were the nucleus of die Cimme- 
rian state, and that the Cimmero-Maeotian population was never 
defeated and subjugated by the Scythians. It will also be remem- 
bered, that the inhabitants traded regularly with the mining districts 
of Transcaucasia. We can understand, that in their struggles with the 
Scythians, the Sindians and the Maeotians welcomed the assistance of 
Greek colonists from overseas, who brought them metals in exchange 
for their fish, and who were well armed and ready to defend their 
profits against Scvthian exactions. Archaeological discoveries have 
shown, that the first Greek towns in the Taman peninsula, dating 
from the seventh century, were not Milesian colonies ; the Carians 
were followed by the Teians, the Mytileneans, and the Clazomenians, 
and the Milesians were probably the latest comers. On the other 
hand, in the sixth century, and most likely in the second half of it, 
the Milesians founded numerous colonies on the other coast of the 
Cimmerian Bosphorus, which had certainly been conquered by the 
Scythians. We have good reason for believing that this coloniza- 
tion was facilitated by the Scythians, who realized, from the 
example of Olbia, the importance of possessing outlets for their 
products, and who highly appreciated the tribute paid them by the 

There existed then in the sixth century two probably rival groups 

*3» K 


of Greek colonies on the Cimmerian Bosphorus: one in Sindian 
territory, and the other in the Scythian empire. But it must not be 
forgotten that geographically and economically the two shores of the 
strait constitute a single area with similar populations, and that for 
centuries they had formed a political unit under Cimmerian domination. 
We must suppose, although it is nowhere stated, that competition led 
to conflicts between these two groups. Supported by the Scythians ; 
commanding the straits of Kerch by virtue of their geographical 
position ; and possessing the only ports which provided trustworthy 
shelter for large sailing ships ; the Greeks of Panticapaeum seem to 
have acquired, in the sixth century and at the beginning of the fifth, 
an ascendancy over the Greeks of the Taman peninsula. The silver 
coins of the sixth century appear to furnish proof : the number of 
types is small, and the coins were probably all struck at Panticapaeum. 

In the fifth century B.C., especially in the second half, the political 
situation seems to have completely changed. The Milesians, as we 
know T , lost their maritime supremacy and their connexion with the 
Persian empire : they became ordinary members of the Athenian 
league. Athens, after the Persian wars, became the chief political 
power in Greece, held the command of the seas, and assiduously 
developed her commerce and her industry. We shall see that the 
Scythian kingdom, after the expedition of Darius, concentrated its 
forces on its western frontier, and began to pay less attention than in 
the sixth century to its struggle with the Sindians. Greek influence 
increased in the straits of the Cimmerian Bosphoras. 

In her external and commercial policy, Athens had to turn her 
eyes more and more towards the east. Her plan to become mistress 
of Egypt collapsed, and her relations with Italy encountered stronger 
and stronger opposition from the Dorians. On the other hand, she 
needed more and more raw material for her industries, and more 
and more food-stuffs, corn and fish, for her growing population. 
The question of food was particularly urgent. Athens, and indeed 
Greece as a whole, could no longer feed itself. The cities of the 
Athenian confederation tried to import as much food-stuffs as possible : 
the other cities did the same. Now the supply of cereals in the 
market was limited, Owing to Dorian competition in Italy, and to 
Persian jealousy, it was impossible to count on the west or on Egypt. 
The only hope of obtaining a sufficient supply of food-stuffs lay in 
the east, in the fishing and agricultural regions of the great Balkan 
and Russian rivers. For Athens, therefore, the head of the league, it 
was a matter of the utmost political and economic importance, to 
cultivate and develop the commercial relations which Miletus had 



From Elizavctinskaya on the Kuban 

IV Cent. b,c. Hermitage, Petiograd 


established with the Black Sea colonies, to foster the colonies, and to 
make them relatively independent of their old masters the Scythians. 
But the political interests of Athens demanded more : Athens claimed 
exclusive control of the export trade, the sole right to dispose of the 
Black Sea commodities, to collect them at Athens and distribute 
them afterwards among her allies. This was why the Athenians 
colonized Amisos and Sinope in the fifth century, and founded 
military colonies, real fortresses, at the most important points on the 
straits of the Bosphorus, not in, but beside, the principal Greek cities : 
at Athenaeum near Theodosia, at Nymphaeum near Panticapaeum, 
and probably at Stratocleia near Phanagoria. Pericles in the year 435, 
and Alcibiades later, personally inspected this branch of the Athenian 
imperial system. 

But the Athenian supremacy was of short duration. Some years 
before the expedition of Pericles, a serious change had taken place in 
the political life of Panticapaeum. The tradition concerning the 
Archeanactids, the first rulers of the city, appears to be the work of 
a forger : but it seems that the city had been governed by an aristo- 
cracy and that the government was supplanted by a tyranny, apparently 
military ; in 438, the power was seized by a chieftain with the Thracian 
name of Spartocos. How can we explain this change and the Thracian 
name of the tyrant, who was succeeded by other members of the same 
f amity, some of whom bore Thracian names, such as Pairisades and 
Spartocos, others Greek, such as Leucon and Sa tyros ? It has been 
suggested that Spartocos was the leader of a Thracian military force, 
engaged by the Panticapaeans for the defence of the town. This is 
extremely unlikely. Whence came the Thraeians, and what route 
did they take ? Did they come by sea, with the permission of Athens ? 
It would surely have been absurd of Athens to import mercenaries 
who might destroy her cleruchies. Against the will of Athens ? No 
less impossible, for Athens was mistress of the sea. Did they come 
by way of the Russian steppes ? A long and dangerous journey : and 
what would the Scythian empire have said to it ? Phe Thraeians were 
always enemies of the Scythians. This hypothesis being unacceptable, 
only one other remains : I have already indicated it in my third 
chapter. The usurpation of Spartocos was a purely internal change : 
as in so many Greek cities, a tyranny took the place of an aristocracy 
which had become an oligarchy. Spartocos must have belonged to 
a native family which had been incorporated into the aristocracy 
which governed the town : hence his Thracian name. We have seen 
that in the prehellenic period the ruling class at Panticapaeum was 
Cimmerian, and that the Cimmerians were Thraeians. 


Did this revolution take place with the consent of Athens ? I 
think not. The semi-Thracian aspect of the new dynasty speaks 
rather for a native reaction against Greek domination, and this theory 
is corroborated by the title which the new rulers assumed : archons 
of Panticapaeum and kings of the Sindians and the Maeotians. The 
fact that among the Sindian princes who ruled at the same period as 
the tyrants of Panticapaeum, we find Thracian names like Gorgippos 
and Komosarye, and that the two dynasties probably united shortly 
after the revolution of Spartocos, seems to show that the principal 
cause of the political change was the necessity of reconciling the 
interests of the natives, and especially of the native aristocracy, with 
those of the Greek population. 

It is worth noticing that this phenomenon was not peculiar to 
Panticapaeum. Similar conditions led to a similar form of govern- 
ment, almost at the same time, at Heracjeia on the Pontus, at Hali- 
carnassus in Asia Minor, at Syracuse in Sicily. The same movement 
gave rise to the Greco- Macedonian monarchy in Macedonia, and later 
to the combination of city-state and monarchy at Pergamon. But 
it was only in the Bosphorus that the form of government thus 
produced was stable : here it lasted for centuries. 

The change in the constitution of Panticapaeum was the beginning 
of a brilliant career for the new state. Possibly one of Pericles 1 
motives for visiting the Euxtne was the desire to enter into relations 
and to come to an arrangement with the new masters of Panticapaeum. 
The understanding which resulted confirmed the power of the tyrant 
without sacrificing the military and economic interests of Athens- 
Athens did not think of withdrawing her garrisons, and the tyrant 
of Panticapaeum had to accept the status of Athenian commercial 
agent for the export of corn to Athens alone. All corn had to pass 
through Piraeus before it could find its way to other Greek cities : an 
enormous political force in the hands of a state like Athens, which 
never knew political or moral scruples. 

But Athenian monopoly and Bosphoran dependence soon came to an 
end. The Peloponnesian war, which was decided in the straits of the 
Thracian Bosphorus, enabled Satyros and Leucon, the successors of 
Spartocos, to assert their sway over all or nearly all the Greek cities, 
to reduce the Atheni an colon iesjt o impotence and to embody them in 
their state, to pursue, without restraint, a policy of unification in the 
Taman peninsula, and to overcome, after a long struggle, the com- 
petition of Pontic Heracleia, the powerful Dorian city which was 
governed, like Panticapaeum, by a tyranny; and which was anxious 
to secure, not only the port of Chersonesus, but also the town of 


Theodosia, by nature the principal centre for the corn trade of the 
Scythian Crimea. Athens was neither able nor willing to impede 
the development of the Bosphoran state : she probably assisted her 
semi-vassal in its conflicts with its numerous enemies. The Athenian 
inscription in honour of the sons of Leucon shows that Athens 
renounced her exclusive right to purchase the com from Pantica- 
paeum. Panticapaeum probably received the right of trading freely, 
on condition of guaranteeing Athens ample privileges in the matter 
of custom duties. The period of Satyros (433/2-389/8), of Leucon 
(380/8-349/8), and of Pairisades I (349/8-310/9) was one of great 
prosperity for the Bosphorus, Leucon was spoken of at Athens as 
the pattern of a virtuous tyrant, Attic historians wrote about him, 
as well as Panticapaean. Statues of these tyrants adorned public 
places in Athens. Pairisades I made bold to attack the Scythians, or 
at any rate to resist their demand for tribute. It will be remembered 
that at this period the Scythians were in conflict with the Sarmatians 
and were slowly retreating towards the Crimean steppes. 

The commercial situation remained unchanged. Athens was still 
the chief customer of Panticapaeum, and in Greece the demand for 
fish and corn was steadily growing. The Scythians became resigned 
to the independence of the Bosphorus state, which had organized a 
powerful army of mercenaries and a regular system of traffic. Great 
quantities of corn were produced everywhere, and the trade flourished 
as never before. The fourth century was a period of general prosperity. 
At Olbia and at Chersonesus, at Theodosia, at Panticapaeum, at 
Phanagoria, at Tanais on the mouth of the Don, the fourth-century 
tombs are full of objects of art, especially gold and silver, imported 
from Greece. We shall speak of these later. 

At the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the third, 
the quiet life of the Bosphorus was disturbed by political disorders. 
But these disorders were of short duration, and the reigns, as we can 
now call them, of Eumelos, of Spartocos III (304/3-284/3), and of 
Pairisades 111 (284 3-about 252) were comparable with those of their 
predecessors. It is to be noted that during the reign of Spartocos III 
Athens not only recognized the complete independence of Pantica- 
paeum, but even concluded with it a defensive military alliance. In 
consequence of the position in which Spartocos III found himself 
after the troubles which followed the death of Pairisades I, he was 
obliged to pay special attention to the recruitment of his army and to 
alliances with other states. 

It was not until the second half of the third century that economic 
and political decay set in. During the fourth and third centuries the 


position of Panticapaeum in the corn trade was an extremely impor- 
tant one. Up to the time of Alexander it had hardly any competitors ; 
after Alexander's conquest of the Eastern world it had to contend 
with Ptolemaic Egypt, with Asia Minor, and with Macedonia and 
Thrace, but the competition was not ruinous. The prosperity of the 
Greek world in the early Hellenistic period, the constant growth of 
population, the continual foundation of new cities, and the general 
development of industry, brought about an enormous increase in the 
demand for the products of South Russia. A close examination of 
the documents of the period shows that the difficulty for producers 
was not lack of customers but insufficiency of output. The Ptolemies 
would never have been able to exercise such powerful influence on the 
cities of the Mediterranean if they had not employed their corn as a 
political weapon. We have seen that Spartocos had already used his 
corn to purchase a military alliance with Athens. No matter how 
many offers of corn and fish were brought to the exchanges of Rhodes, 
Delos, and Delphi, customers could always be found. 

The decay of Panticapaeum, therefore, cannot have been occa- 
sioned by the competition of other producers. The weakness of the 
Bosphoran kingdom was due to other causes. The output became 
smaller and smaller. Take the quantity of corn exported by Panti- 
capaeum in the fourth and third centuries : under Leucon I 400,000 
medimni by or for Athens alone ; and how much besides for the 
other Green cities ! Compare this with what the whole Bosphoran 
kingdom paid to Mithridates : 180,000 medimni all told. The 
difference is enormous. The cause of the decrease was political 
disturbance in the steppes of South Russia. The Scythian empire 
was collapsing under the blows of the Sarmatians and of the Thracians. 
As early as the beginning of the third century, the Gauls, accompanied, 
it may be, by Germanic tribes, were advancing towards the Danube 
and ravaging the outskirts of Olbia, Read the inscription of Protogenes, 
and you will see how precarious was the situation of Olbia at the 
beginning of the third century, and what anarchy prevailed in the 
neighbouring steppes. The Bosphorus was in a slightly better 
position. Trie Scythian kingdom held out in the steppes between 
Don and Dnieper, as well as in the Crimea. The valley of the Kuban 
had not yet been occupied by Sarmatian tribes. But even so the 
existence of the Bosphoran kingdom, and of the city of Chersonesus, 
which depended for its prosperity upon the Bosphorus, became more 
and more uncertain. The Scythians, driven back towards the 
Crimea, threatened the cities, demanded, as at Olbia, a heavier and 
heavier tribute, and neither the Bosphoran kingdom nor Chersonesus 






was wealthy enough to compete, in the market for mercenaries, with 
the agents of the Hellenistic monarchs, so as to form a strong hireling 
army. The army had to be recruited from the citizens and from the 
subject tribes, as had happened for the first time under Eumelos : 
production suffered in consequence, and the armed power of the state 
hardly gained. The people, accustomed to mercenary armies, became 
discontented, planned revolution, and sometimes carried out its plan. 
The trade with the Scythians was no longer the same. Constant war, 
and the invasion of Scythian territory from the west and from the 
cast, crippled the Scythian kingdom and reduced the trade to 
insignificance. Besides, the Bosphorus was permanently at war with 
the Scythians. The hour was approaching when the Greeks of South 
Russia would be forced to renounce their independence and seek the 
armed protection of powerful friends, whoever these friends might be. 
What came of this situation we shall see in our sixth chapter. 

I have tried to give a survey of the political and economic causes 
which created the state of the Bosphorus, and which preserved it for 
more than two centuries as an independent power and as an important 
part of the whole ancient world. What was the political and social 
structure of this state ? And what kind of civilization did it achieve ? 

I have tried to show that the state of the_Bosphorus was originally 
a military tyranny_and _re mained on e : it ^ew~ouxijf-ff-coirlprom1se" 
between the native population and - the Greek colonists. For the 
natives, the ruling dynasty w^always a dynasty oi kings, since it was 
kings that for centuries they had been accustomed to obey. The 
Greeks, in order to preserve their dominant position and the founda- 
tion of their economic prosperity, were obliged to abandon their civic 
liberties and to take for their chiefs the Hellenized barbarians w T ho 
ruled the native population. For the Greeks, this form of government 
was a tyranny, although the official style of the tyrant was the consti- 
tutional title of archon. This tyranny interests us because it was not 
a passing incident, like the tyrannies in many Greek cities during the 
sixth and fourth and third centuries B. c, but a form of settled 
government which existed for centuries and which gradually trans- 
Formed itself into a Hellenistic monarchy comparable with monarchies 
in Asia Minor : Bithynia with its Thracian population, Cappadocia and 
Pontus with their semi -Iranian dynasties, Commagene and Armenia 
with their Hellenized native kings. The only analogies, in the ancient 
world, to this constitutional form of tyranny which developed into a 
monarchy, are the tyranny of Pontic Heracleia, and even more that of 
Syracuse in Sicily. In all three places, a military tyranny based on 
mercenaries : a strong native element in the population : no council 


of elders, no boule : a popular assembly, without power ; finally, 
constitutional fictions to disguise the reality. 

Still more interesting, the social structure of the Bosphoran state 
hardly differed from that of the states which we have compared with 
it. The state was based on an agricultural native population, attached 
to the soil : a class of great landowners, friends and kinsmen of the 
king, who was himself a landed proprietor, owning the soil of the 
whole kingdom ; and a very powerful class of Greek merchants, some 
citizens of the cities in the kingdom, others foreigners, who owned 
ships and who organized the traffic with the neighbouring semi- 
independent tribes as well as with the Scythian kingdom. The king 
himself was undoubtedly one of these merchants. He exported the 
grain which he received as tribute from his vassals and as contribution 
from his serfs. We must also reckon with a numerous low*er middle 
class residing in the towns, artisans and small tradesmen ; and with 
a numerous population of slaves, who loaded and unloaded the vessels, 
laboured in the factories, and so forth. 

The same structure is observable wherever a Greek population 
was obliged to submit to a native, Hellenized, or Greek dynasty whose 
rule was based on a native population not barbarous but accustomed 
to monarchic government. Peculiar to the structure of the Bosphoran 
state is the historical evolution, more easily apprehended here than 
elsewhere : an Ionian Greek city transforming itself into a Greco- 
Maeotian state with the Greeks in a privileged position, and gradually 
changing into a Hellenistic monarchy in which the two elements are 
confounded, the natives becoming Hellenized and the Greeks 
gradually adopting the spirit and the habits of the natives. The dualism 
can be noticed in every department of life. In religion, purely Greek 
cults are replaced by various forms of native cult, particularly that 
of the Great Goddess whom we have already mentioned. Nearly 
every Greek town in the Taman peninsula had a temple of this pre- 
Hellenic divinity. Two of these sanctuaries have been excavated, 
one near Phanagorta, where the Great Goddess was identified with 
the Greek Aphrodite, the other on a promontory in one of the lakes 
of the Kuban delta, that of Tsukur, where she was worshipped, as in 
Asia Minor and in Macedonia, under the name of Artemis Agrotera. 
We have every reason to suppose that there were temples of the same 
deity near Hermonassa and in the vicinity of Gorgippia, the modern 
Anapa. The same cult gradually became predominant at Panticapaeum, 
and it is well known that the patron goddess of Chersonesus was the 
Parthenos, who is represented, in the guise of Artemis, on the coins 
of that city. A significant testimony to the popularity of the Great 



Goddess in the peninsula of Taman is afforded by her prevalence, as 
Kore or as Demeter, in the decoration of tomb-furniture from the 
Taman graves : I would instance the important part played by 
Demeter in the lady's tomb at Great Bliznitsa. Stephani inferred 
that the lady had been a priestess of Demeter. I am more inclined 
to believe that all the queens, or consorts of native kings and princes, 
for example the queen buried under the barrow of Karagodeuashkh, 
were priestesses of the Great Goddess, who was sometimes identified 
with Demeter and sometimes with Aphrodite. The costume which 
they wore on special occasions during their lifetime, and which 
accompanied them into the grave, was the ritual costume of the 
grand priestess, and as such recalled the costume of the Goddess 
herself. Curiously enough, the Hellenized native queen who was 
buried under the barrow of Great Bliznitsa had a number of gold 
plaques sewn on to her clothing which represented the Great Goddess 
herself. We shall return to them when we come to speak of the goddess 
worshipped by the Scythians (see p. 107). The Great Goddess appears 
in the form of the Asiatic mrwa B^pmv : her chthonic character is 
emphasized by her serpent feet. At the same time, it is shown by 
certain attributes that she was conceived as the chief goddess of the 
Bosphoran kingdom, the patron and guardian of the state. In the 
more explicit of the plaques, her wings terminate in horned and 
leonine griffin-heads ; she masters two eagle-headed griffins ; or she 
holds in her right hand the silen's head which figures on Panticapaean 
coins and in her left a dagger, and is accompanied by the symbol of 
Bosphoran prosperity, the ear of corn (see p . 3 30 , fig . 1 7 , and pi . XVI II , 
4, similar plaques from Kul-Oba and from Chersonesus, compare 
pi. XVIII, 3 — the same goddess represented as Aphrodite — and 2— 
the Silen, the national god of vegetation). As we examine these plaques 
we cannot help recalling the Maeotian legend, mentioned above, of the 
autochthonous goddess who slew the giants— native deities of fertility 
—to please Herakles, the Greek or Iranian conquering god. We shall 
see that the silens and satyrs on the coins of Panticapaeum probably 
represent those same native gods of vegetation and of reproduction, 
who are associated with the Great Goddess in the plaques. 

The temples on the Taman peninsula, as we learn from an 
inscription of Roman date, were organized like those in Asia Minor, 
especially those in Pontus, Cappadocia, and Armenia ; a college of 
priests or priestesses with a grand priest or priestess at its head ; 
vast domains belonging to the goddess ; and serfs working for the 
goddess and for the priests. 

There is the same dualism in the material life of the population, 



especially of the ruling class. For nearly a century excavation, 
uninterrupted if not always scientific, has been going on in the cities 
of the Bosphoran state, and most of the city cemeteries have been 
explored : we can thus form an accurate notion of the civilization 
and characteristics of the governing class in town and in country. 

One characteristic is the opulence of the kingdom in general, and 
of the urban middle class. The tombs of the Bosphoran Greeks are 
well constructed, the coffins are often carefully wrought, and the 
objects interred with the dead are sometimes of high material and 
artistic value. On the other hand, the urban middle class has kept its 
character surprisingly pure : Ionian Greek at Olbia and in the Bos- 
phorus, Dorian at Chersonesus. In the Ionian cities, just as in the 
mother country, cremation and inhumation were practised side by 







III, ■ 

Fie. 7. 

side. The funeral rites are purely Greek; the funerary furniture is 
no less so ; from the sixth to the third century it mainly consists of 
what may be called athletic objects. Weapons are rare, for the 
citizens did not serve in the army, but strigils, oil-flasks, and oil-jars 
are regularly found in the graves of men. Women have mostly jewels 
and articles of toilet. In purely Greek tombs of this period nearly all 
the objects are imported. And they are not cheap goods. The Ionian 
vases are sometimes of the highest quality ; the Attic vases, which 
predominate from the end of the sixth century onwards, often bear 
signatures of artists : the so-called Phoenician polychrome glass is 
sometimes exquisitely fine : the gold trinkets probably came from the 
best-known workshops, and are frequently splendid specimens of the 
Greek jeweller *s art. 

But it is not the Greek tombs that captivate the imagination of 
the visitor to Kerch or to the Hermitage : such tombs, more or less 
rich, are found in most parts of the Greek world, and the tomb 


r. Engraved CHALCEDONY SCARABOID, Persian 



furniture does not vary much from district to district. The most 
interesting feature of the burial-grounds at Panticapaeum and in the 
Taman peninsula, is the great tumuli (kurgans) on the summits of 
Mount Mithridates and Yuz-Oba, two ranges of hills in the neighbour- 
hood of Panticapaeum. There are also tumuli along the roads leading 
from Panticapaeum to the steppe, and on most of the hill-tops in the 
Taman peninsula. 



The tumulus is carefully constructed and surrounded by a walJ 
of dressed stone (wp^'s) : underneath it is a large sepulchral building, 
a chamber of dressed stone with a corridor joining it to the circum- 
ference of the tumulus (figs, 7 and 8), The chamber and the corridor 
are vaulted : the vault is often of the corbelled or * Egyptian * type, round 
or square, with one course of stones projecting beyond the next ; true 
barrel vaults are occasionally found. Walls and roof were frequently 
painted, and sometimes lined with costly stuffs : gold plaques were 
often sewn on to the stuff. In the middle of the chamber was a coffin, 
usually of wood— rarely of marble — , carved, inlaid, and painted. 
Several of these coffins have been found : they are marvels or decora- 


tive art. Round the coffin were Greek vases of the best fabrics, often 
not only painted but modelled and gilded as well : one of the best 
known is the vase with the signature of Xenophantos which represents 
King Darius hunting. The bodies laid in the coffins wore festal 
costume ; the men had weapons with them, the women jewels. 

Some of the graves, w T hich were discovered intact, have yielded 
superb collections of ancient jewellery and goldsmith's work : 
engraved stones signed by celebrated artists ; necklaces, bracelets, 
earrings, unequalled in the ancient world. The finest objects in the 
Hermitage came almost entirely from these monumental tombs. The 
same opulence everywhere— at Panticapaeum, at Nymphaeum, at 
Theodosia, in the Taman peninsula, at Chersonesus : but not the 
same funeral rites. The graves in the Taman peninsula preserve 
features which recall the native Thracian and Scythian graves, such 
as bloody sacrifices after the funeral ceremony, and the interment of 
horses and of funeral chariots. 

Such graves are neither purely Greek nor purely native. The 
Greeks 01 this period did not bury their dead under barrows, in 
chambers with Egyptian vaults, in sumptuous coffins. They no 
longer deposited whole fortunes in their tombs, like the inhabitants 
of the Bosphoran kingdom. Again, in the funerary ritual and the 
choice and character of the objects placed in them, the Scythian 
tumulary graves have nothing in common with the monumental 
tombs of Panticapaeum. There is no trace at Panticapaeum of the 
interment of horses, no human sacrifice, and no groups of sacred 
objects laid beside the dead. We have two completely different 
rituals : moreover, the Panticapaean ritual influenced the Scythian, 
not the Scythian the Panticapaean. We cannot claim that the monu- 
mental graves of the Taman peninsula were equally independent of 
Scythian practice : Scythian influence is certain. Although they 
preserve, m principle, the funerary ritual found at Panticapaeum, 
which recalls that of heroic Greece, familiar to us from the Homeric 

f)oems, with its bloody sacrifices and its funeral feasts, they neverthe- 
ess appear to have adopted certain customs from the Scythians, 
especially the slaughter and interment of the horses which had been 
harnessed to the hearse. Remains of horses and harness were found 
in the barrows of Great and Little Bliznitsa and of the Vasyurinskaya 
I Gora, the richest and stateliest tombs in the Taman peninsula. True 
analogies with the funerary ritual and the sepulchral structures of 
Panticapaeum are to be found not in Scythian country but partly, as 
I have said, in the Greece of heroic times, and partly in those 



barbarian lands which were strongly influenced by heroic Greece. 
In Thrace, especially, we observe the same characteristics. Besides 
the barrows in Macedonia, excavated by Heuzey and Kinch, which 
contain painted sepulchral chambers with barrel vaults, I would 
mention the sepulchral chambers discovered near Salonica, and near 
Lozengrad in Bulgaria. The latter is particularly interesting : the 
mode of construction recalls the Mycenaean tholos, and the plan is 
exactly like those of the Tsarski tombs and the Golden Tumulus : 
the date is that of the Panticapaean graves, the fourth century b, c. 

Similar monuments have com e to light in Asia M inor, especially 
in Pontus, Caria and Lycia ; asl yell as hT~fftruria« It must be 
remembered that Asia Minor was partly peopled by Thracian tribes. 
Throughout these countries, we come across tumuli, sepulchral 
chambers of dressed stone, rich coffins, varied and sumptuous tomb 
furniture. The funerary ritual is almost the same, and here also it 
vividly recalls heroic, that is to say pre- Hellenic Greece, Everything 
suggests that the great tombs in the Bosphoran kingdom were built 
for members of the ruling class, which, as we have already seen, was 
not of pure Greek origin, but of mixed stock, a combination of native 
elements with the aristocracy of Greek colonists. 

What strikes us particularly in the monumental tombs of Panti- 
capaeum and the Taman peninsula is not the tumuli themselves, for 
the shape of these huge earthen mounds does not greatly vary from 
one place or one period to another ; much more interesting, both 
historically and artistically , are the sepulchral chambers of dressed stone. 
Some dozens of them have been found ; not a few a re in almost perfect 
preservation. The chambers of the Golden, Tsarski, and MelekChesme 
tumuli, in the neighbourhood of Kerch, are all three well known : 
the two latter are accessible and attract a great number of visitors. 
Not so well known are the chambers of the Yiiz-Oba kurgans, 
near Kerch, which are partially destroyed, those in the Taman pen- 
insula, and those in the vicinity of Gorgippia (see figs. 7 and 8). Some 
of these can be dated by means of their contents : none are as old as 
the fifth century : the grandest belong to the beginning of the fourth (f ^ 
century b.c, the more summary to the second half of the fourth and 
the first half of the third. It has been proposed to place the finest 
examples of the first series, the Golden and Tsarski kurgans, in the 
fifth century B.C.: but without good reason. The mode of construc- 
tion is exactly the same as in the sepulchral chambers of Yuz-Oba, 
which date from the first half of the fourth century. Now we have 
seen that the fourth century was a period of great prosperity in the 

7 8 


Cimmerian Bosphorus, whereas in the fifth century Nymphaeum and 
the other Athenian cities grew rich at the expense of Panticapaeum. 
This is shown, on the one hand, by the rich fifth -century finds at 
Nymphaeum — a mixed cemetery with Greek and Greco-Scythian 
tombs, and several tumuli — and in the Taman peninsula— the 
barrows of the Seven Brothers; on the other, by the rarity and 
poverty of fifth-century tombs at Panticapaeum, not one of which has 
yielded jewellery comparable with that of the fifth-century tombs in 
the Taman peninsula and in the cemetery of Nymphaeum ; while 
the vases of severe red-figured style are very poorly represented at 
Panticapaeum, especially compared with the vases of the sixth and 
fourth centuries. We have no right to suppose that costly monuments 
were constructed in Panticapaeum at a time when the city and her 
rulers were impoverished by dissension at home, by w r ars abroad, and 
by complete subordination, if not vassalage, to all-powerful Athens. 

I said above, that technically and architecturally, the tomb 
chambers of Panticapaeum were real creations. The forms are 
various and elaborate. The roof is sometimes a rectangular corbelled 
vault, sometimes corbelled but rounded : some architects used the 
barrel vault, combining it, in the double chambers, w r ith the corbelled 
vault. It has been conjectured that in constructing tomb-chambers 
with the so-called Egyptian vault, the Panticapaean architects were 
following an archaic custom, were imitating heroa and tombs of the 
Mycenaean period : in short, that they acted like the Augustan 
sculptors when these carved their archaizing statues. I do not believe 
this conjecture to be correct. As soon as Greek architects learned to 
construct barrel vaults they put their knowledge into practice, and 
the barrel vault gradually supplanted the older corbelled vault. But 
the barrel vault, which apart from the Egyptian vault, is the only 
suitable method of roofing a sepulchral chamber surmounted by a 
tumulus several metres high, was not introduced into Greece until 
the middle of the fourth century. Moreover, the Greek barrel vault 
is very imperfect compared with the Roman. It must be borne in 
mind, that in the Bosphoran barrel vaults of the fourth century, the 
stones are almost always held together by metal clamps, a process 
which the Romans never employed;. Now before the Greek architects 
adopted the Oriental system of barrel vaults, what processes did they 
know of for constructing a tomb-chamber surmounted by a tumulus ? 
The only process known to them was the corbelled vault, rectangular 
or circular, the same which was used in the Mycenaean period,. I have 
no doubt, although we possess no examples, that the corbelled vault 
was continuously employed in Thrace, and in Greece and in Asia 




Minor as well, from, the Mycenaean period onwards, for underground 
buildings and especially for tumulary fjraves. All the Panticapaean 
architects did was to import the technique to Panticapaeum and to 
perfect it. But they were not servile imitators : they managed to 
give their buildings an air of grandeur and a distinctive charm : they 
contrived to find proportions which inspire us with a profound respect 
for their taste and for their technical acquirement. It surely needed 
a thorough knowledge of the builder's art to construct a tomb- 
chamber with an Egyptian vault, which could resist for centuries the 
enormous pressure of an earthen mound some ten or fifteen metres 
high I The tomb-chambers of the Bosphoran kurgans are nearly 
always found intact, though stripped of their contents. If many or 
most of the Panticapaean tomb-chambers are at present in ruins, it is 
not the fault of the Bosphoran architects, but of the inhabitants of 
modern Kerch, who have been attracted by the excellent dressed 
stone and by the iron and bronze clamps, 

I may observe, before taking leave of these buildings, that when 
I have made my way down the corridor of Tsarski Kurgan, with its 
Egyptian vault, when I have passed from the corridor to the tomb- 
chamber with its rounded corbelled vault, when I have visited the 
Yuz-Oba tomb -chambers, I have always been moved by a feeling of 
deep respect and of lively admiration for the builders of these impressive 
and mysterious monuments. It is greatly to be regretted that their 
civil and religious architecture has completely disappeared. 

Some of the objects found in these tomb-chambers were imported, 
from Greece ffor instance the silver bracelet, pi. XV, 2 ; the necklace 
and earrings found at Nymphaeum, pi. XVI, 2-4; the earrings found 
at Theodosia, pi. XVIII, 1 ; the necklace from Chersonesus and the 
painted vase from Taman, pi. XVII), or from the Orient (the gem from 
Nymphaeum, pi. XVI, 1) : but side by side with these, there are others 
which are unquestionably local work, and it is these which concern us the 
more nearly. There is no doubt that the corns of Panticapaeum were 
struck in Panticapaeum itself. In the sixth and fifth centuries, they 
differ very little from the coins of the Ionian cities in Asia Minor. The 
Samian coins, in particular, served as models for the silver of Pantica- 
paeum. But at the end of the fifth, and in the fourth century— the 
date rests principally on stylistic considerations — probably at the time 
of the reconstitution of the Bosphoran state, Panticapaean coinage 
suddenly changes. Gold staters were now struck, and the types of 
these staters, and of the silver coinage, are quite new. These types are 
not imitated from the contemporary coinage of other Greek states. 
The Cyzicene staters offer analogies, but Cyzicus probably imitated 


the Bosphoran types, not inversely. Doubtless Cyzicus wished to 
safeguard its monopoly of issuing gold staters, which, until the 
appearance of the Bosphoran staters, had been uncontested except 
by Lampsacus ; and endeavoured to oust the Bosphoran gold by 
means of an electrum coinage with similar types. It did not succeed. 

The fourth-century coins struck in the Bosphorus are masterpieces 
of original and forcible art (pi. XVIII, 5). 'l*he style is purely Greek. 
Not so the types. Look at the heads of bearded si Jens and beardless 
satyrs. We shall see, in the next chapter, how strongly they influenced 
the canonical rendering of Scythians in the art of the Greeks. But we 
can also trace the influence of the Scythian type on these mythical 
heads. We have been bidden to recognize a representation of the 
god Pan, and an etymological allusion, in the Greek manner, to the 
name of Panticapaeum. I cannot accept this suggestion. We are 
familiar with the type of Pan as it was developed in Greek art- 
It offers only the faintest of resemblances with the heads on the 
Bosphoran coins- They are more likely to represent silens and satyrs, 
but they are not faithful reproductions of the established types. I 
should be more inclined to take them for heads of some native, 
probably 'Iliracian divinity, the great god of vegetation who became 
the Greek Dionysos and who sometimes figures, in the guise of a 
bearded silen, on coins of Greco-Thracian cities (compare the gold 
plaques, in the form of a silen's head, found by hundreds in the 
Crimea and in the Tainan peninsula : pi. X VIII, 2). Is it an accident, 
that one of the Bosphoran dynasts was named Satyros ? 

The types on the reverse of the Bosphoran coins are also of local 
origin. 1 he arms of Panticapaeum are not Greek : the griffin 
treading upon an ear of corn or a fish, the sources whence the rulers 
and the citizens of the Bosphorus derived their wealth. The lion- 
headed griffin is the Iranian animal, created in Babylonia, and thence- 
forward common throughout Asia, especially in the Iranian area. 
I have already mentioned the sculptures from a tomb in Paphkgonia, 
which belong, it is true, to the archaic period, but which offer many 
points of comparison with the reverses of Bosphoran coins. 

It must be recognized, therefore, that the engravers of the Panti- 
capaean dies were no mere imitators. Masters of Greek craftsman- 
ship, endowed with Greek creative genius, they invented original 
types which are true emblems of the Bosphoran state, half-Greek, 
half-Thracian, with strong Iranian influence. In painting, the art is 
of the same partially local kind. True that those masterpieces of 
decorative art, the painted wooden and sculptured coffins, may have 
been imported from Greece or Asia Minor : I do not believe it, but 




CRIMEA. Hermitage, Petrograd 

GOLD COINS OF PANT ICAFAEU M . British Museum and Lorn re 

IV C*f>tot t4 r 


owing to the scarcity of wood-carvings from classical times, I cannot 
offer proof. But examine the wall paintings in the houses and tombs 
of this period. We have a whole series of these, partly from Panti- 
capaeum, partly from the Taman peninsula ; I have recently repub- 
lished them in a special work. These paintings are undoubtedly 
local work; they were executed on the spot by Greek artists. They 
follow the Greek fashion, and help us to reconstruct the pre- 
Pompeian system of mural decoration in Greece. But observe them 
closely. The house decorations are very like those at Delos. Yet 
there are important differences. At Panticapaeum, the colour is 
richer and more various, but the architectural effect is poorer : both 
characteristics of Oriental art. Study the paintings of the two Taman 
barrows, Great Bliznitsa and Vasyurinskaya Gora. The latter please 
by their colour : look at the juxtaposition of the dark blue on the roof 
with the bright red on the walls. The others follow the tradition of 
the monumental painting in Greek temples : sober ornamentation 
of friezes and capitals. But the head of Demeter, on the keystone of 
the Egyptian vault, is not quite Greek. Compare it with the head of the 
same goddess in a grave belonging to the first century a, d,, and the 
type will be seen to be the same : this is not Demeter, save in name 
only ; it is really a native deity, the Great Goddess, mother of gods 
and men. 

I consider myself justified, therefore, in affirming that the state 
of the Bosphorus was not by any means a group of little Greek towns 
lost on the shores of the Black Sea and living on what the mother 
country could send them. It developed an interesting and original 
form of life. It had the sagacity to invent a semi-Greek constitution, 
which held the state together for centuries ; it contrived to make this 
form of government popular in Greece, and by means of propaganda 
issued by its historians, to install Bosphoran tyrants, such as Leucon 
and Pairisades, in the great gallery of famous statesmen whose names 
were familiar in the Greek schools. It succeeded in spreading Greek 
civilization among its Scythian neighbours, and in saturating its 
non-Greek subjects with that civilization. For centuries it guaranteed 
the Greek world a cheap and abundant supply of provisions. It 
transformed wide tracts of steppe into cultivated fields. Finally, it 
created a vigorous art, which achieved brilliant triumphs, especially 
in toreutic, and of which I shall speak further in the following 

In a word, the Bosphorus of the classical Greek period played an 
important part in the life of the ancient world. The time is past 
when, in the imagination of cultivated persons, the Greek world was 

a 3S3 m 



bounded by the shores of Attica and of the Peloponnese. The power 
of the Greek genius consisted , above all, in its universality, in its 
flexibility, in its power of adapting itself to unfamiliar conditions, 
and of constructing, in foreign surroundings, focuses of civilization, in 
which whatsoever was strong and fertile in the native life was combined 
with the eternal creations of Greek intelligence. 

This is what we see, wherever we look, on the outskirts of the 
Greek world, long before the so-called Hellenistic age, which merely 
entered into a heritage bequeathed by the Greeks of the fifth and 
especially the fourth century. Take Italy, where Samnites, Apulians, 
Etruscans, and, last of all, Latins, collaborated with the Greeks in 
producing a Greco-Italic civilization of high achievement : witness 
the painted vases made in Italy, and the mural paintings in Samnite 
and Etruscan tombs. Take Spain, with its Greco-Iberian art. Take 
Celtic Gaul, and the art of the La Tine period, which was strongly 
influenced by the Greek city of Marseilles, and which has much in 
common with the Greco- Iranian art of Panticapaeum, excelling, like 
that art, in toreutic. Little is known of Thrace in the Greek and 
Hellenistic epoch : but the cemeteries of the Greek cities in Thracian 
territory, so far as they have been explored, show so many resem- 
blances with those of the Greek cities in South Russia, especially 
Olbia and her neighbours, that I do not doubt that in Thrace also 
the Greek artists availed themselves of their contact with the natives 
and adapted Greek art to the needs and tastes of the Thracian popula- 
tion. The great tumulary graves of Thracian chieftains, with their 
vaulted tomb -chambers, which have been found in Thrace and in 
Macedonia, present many analogies with the Bosphoran graves, both 
in their architecture and in their painted decoration, and bear witness 
to a close union, just as at Panticapaeum, of local aristocracy and 
Greek colonists. I feel sure that systematic exploration of the 
Thracian tumuli will yield the same result as the work of Russian 
scholars in Scythian tombs. Finally, I am convinced that careful 
investigation in Pont us, in Cappadocia, in Paphlagonia, in Bithynia 
will reveal similar phenomena. 

One of the most pressing tasks, in the scientific exploration of 
Asia Minor, is the excavation of the oldest and wealthiest Greek 
colonies on the southern shore of the Black Sea : Sinope, Amisos, 



WE have seen how the Scythians spread over the South Russian 
steppes in the seventh century, how they consolidated their 
empire and extended it westwards as far as the Danube and 
even beyond . We are somewhat ill acquainted with their political history , 
for they have left no written monuments, and the allusions in Herodotus 
and other Greek writers are few and vague. It is a pity that we do not 
possess the books of Ephorus in which he related the history of the 
Scythians In the sixtfr, fifth and fourth centuries : all we have is a few 
extracts from his description of Scythian manners and customs. 

Notwithstanding the meagreness of our information, we can still 
trace the general lines along which the Scythian empire evolved. It 
was primarily a conquering state. Like the Cimmerians before them, 
the Scythians tended to embody in their empire Thrace on the one 
hand, and Transcaucasia on the other, so as to have access to Asia 
Minor, with which they maintained regular commercial relations 
through the Greek cities. This tendency brought them into contact 
with Persia, the other Iranian power at this period, which was much 
stronger and much more highly civilized than the Scythian state, but 
resembled it in its conquering propensity and in its aspiration to 
universal empire. The two Iranian movements met in Thrace and 
in the Caucasus. 

The Scythian world was by no means unknown to the Persians. 
Within their own empire, on their north-west confines, the Persians 
had to contend with the Sacians and the Scythians of Asia Minor, who 
were closely akin to the European Scythians. It was not until about 
590 b. c. that the Medes, and after them die Persians, were able to 
substitute their own supremacy for the Scythian in Asia Minor. 
Even after the final Persian conquest of Asia Minor, there were whole 
provinces in which the majority of the population, or at least the 
predominant section, was Scythian. I have already mentioned 
certain portions of Armenia, Sakasene and Skythene, in which the 
Scythians undoubtedly formed the ruling aristocracy. We know that 
even in Hellenistic and Roman times the Iranian families constituted 


a ruling class* and that the social structure of the country closely 
resembled the feudalism of the Iranian countries in general- We have 
no reason to suppose that the Iranian parts of Armenia were differently 
organized during the period of Persian domination, a domination 
which was probably only nominal- 
It must not be forgotten, on the other hand, that there was 
constant communication between the two shores, northern and 
southern, of the Black Sea, and that the existence of a flourishing and 
independent Scythian kingdom on the northern shore fostered the 
aspirations of the Scythians on the southern shore. Thus the Scythian 
kingdom on the Black Sea littoral was not only known to the Persian 
empire, but dreaded by it. 

Darius's project for annexing the whole of Greece was imperilled 
by Scythian ascendancy in Thrace, and by the chance of a Scythian 
onslaught at the very moment when his troops were marching on 
Greece by way of Thrace and Macedonia. If Darius really wished 
to become master of the Greek world, it was essential for him to 
protect his rear both in the Caucasus and in Thrace. This is the 
true explanation of the famous expedition of Darius ; in Herodotus* 
account, the historical facts are almost completely obscured by fable 
and legend. I cannot think that Darius was bent upon conquest, or 
that he intended to destroy and subjugate the Scythian empire. He 
was accompanied by Ionian generals who knew Scythia well and had 
no motive for deceiving their supreme chief. They were fully con- 
scious o£ the difficulties which such a plan presented. It is more likely 
that Darius had the same intention as Philip and Alexander before 
their expedition to Asia. To make an impressive raid into the 
Scythian kingdom as a proof of Persian power, to deal one or two 
heavy blows at the Scythian army, while his Cappadocian satrap 
Ariaramnes conducted a naval demonstration in the waters of the Greek 
colonies who were tributary to the Scythians, and along the northern 
and eastern shores of the Black Sea : this was all that Darius desired 
to do. I make no doubt that he attained his object. Ctesias states 
that the expedition of Ariaramnes was completely successful, and that 
by his raid he not only managed to reconnoitre the country but to 
capture a member of the Scythian royal family, Marsagetes, the king's 
brother. What Herodotus gives us is the Greco-Scythian version of 
the story ; but he cannot conceal the fact, that Darius himself advanced 
far enough into Scythian territory to terrify the Scythians and to force 
them to respect the Persian forces. Darius, who was an Iranian like 
the Scythians, and who had fought the Scythians in Asia, knew 
beforehand that he had to deal with a mobile cavalry force, and he 


was doubtless well prepared for those tactics which were afterwards 
adopted by the Farthians and are hence no less familiar to us than 
they were to the Persian king. Did he suffer from lack of water ? 
I can hardly suppose so : South Russia is not the Sahara : drinking 
water is to be had everywhere. 

In a word, I believe that Darius succeeded in his enterprise, and 
that his expedition to Thrace and to Scythia made it possible for him, 
at a given moment, to invade Greece through Thrace and Macedonia. 
It is no proof of the contrary, that after this expedition the Scythians 
executed a raid which carried them as far as the Thracian Chersonese : 
it is merely another proof, that the Scythian empire was an aggressive 

The expedition of Darius did not seriously affect the Scythian 
empire : but it put a stop to expansion southward and westward, and 
confined the Scythians to the frontiers marked by the Caucasus on 
the south and by the Danube on the west. 

Much more momentous for the Scythian empire were the develop- 
ment of the Bosphoran state, described in our fourth chapter, and the 
influence of the Athenians in Thrace, where they succeeded in con- 
solidating 2 powerful native state, that of the Odrysians, which was 
capable of seriously impeding any attempt of the Scythian kings to 
renew their expansion towards the west. The Odrysian state, which 
I cannot discuss at length, existed as a vassal of the Athenian empire 
until the second half of the fourth century, and presents striking 
analogies, politically and socially, with the kingdom of the Bosphorus. 
The kingaom of the Bosphorus, which commanded the mouths of 
the Don, together with the city of Tanais, founded as an advanced 
post by Panticapaeum, cut the Scythian empire in two, and the creation 
of a sttble state in the north of the Balkan peninsula closed the door 
to the west. 

But it was not until the end of the fourth century that the position 
of the Scythians in South Russia became critical. The kingdom of 
the Bosphorus was richer and more powerful than ever : the Spartocid 
tyrants, by engaging mercenaries and by mobilizing the native popu- 
lation, got together an army which was probably equal if not superior 
to the Scythian. On the east, the Sarmatian tribes slowly advanced 
over the Ural and Orenburg steppes, crossed the Volga, occupied the 
line of the Don and very likely put an end to Scythian supremacy on 
the Kuban : we have seen that none of the Scythian graves on the 
Kuban date from the third century. In consequence the Scythians 
were obliged to concentrate their attention upon the western and 
northern portion of their state. We shall see that they contrived to 


enlarge their empire northwards in the regions of Kiev, of Poltava 
and of Vor6nezh, and to plant their civilization in places where 
hitherto little Scythian influence had been felt. 

Let us now turn to the west. Pompeius Trogus furnishes us with 
precious information about certain events, which took place at the 
end of the fourth century, and which bear witness to vigorous Scythian 
expansion towards the west. We learn that the Scythian king Atcas 
advanced to the southern bank of the Danube and attacked the His- 
trians : that is to say, he was in process of occupying the Dobrudzha, 
Philip of Macedon encountered him and defeated him with 
great loss. As Philip was returning, he was assaulted by the Tribal- 
fians and had to relinquish all his booty. The story related by Justin 
is full of suspicious details, romantic and anecdotical, but the fact 
of the expedition of Ateas and his fight with Philip remains certain. 
The defeat of Ateas was by no means final. We know from the same 
author that at the time of Alexander's eastern expedition, one of his 
generals, Zopyrion, made an expedition to Scythia, probably to cover 
northern Macedonia : after advancing as far as the walls of Olbia, 
which may have been held by the Scythians, he perished with his 
whole army of thirty thousand men. These two events testify to a 
Scythianpolicy of westward expansion, resolute, vigorous and syste- 
matic. The aim of the Scythians was not only to strengthen their 
power beyond the Danube, but also to occupy, if possible, the whole 
western bank of the Black Sea, and to reduce to vassalage the small 
tribal states in the adjacent part of Thrace, To judge by the expedi- 
tions of Philip and of Alexander, the danger was grave, and the 
Macedonians had great trouble in dislodging the Scythians from 
Thrace and in driving them back beyond the Danube, 

No doubt the Alacedonian expeditions weakened the Scythian 
power, but they did not succeed in destroying Scythian influence on 
the Danube and beyond it. The Scythians were able to hold out for 
a long time, perhaps until the Roman period, in the Dobrudzha, 
where they founded a fairly powerful state, which endured for 
centuries, outlasting even the ruin of the great Scythian state in 
South Russia and the retreat of the Scythians into the Crimea. The 
existence of a Scythian state in the Dobrudzha, resembling that in the 
Crimea, is attested by archaeological and numismatical evidence. 
I shall speak later of the silver rhyton found at Poroina, which closely 
resembles contemporary work of the same class from South Russia, 
and which points to similar religious and political ideas. I shall also 
mention the instructive series of coins issued by the Scythian kings 
of the Dobrudzha, which suggest that the Greek cities of Torni and 


Istros were dependants of the Scythian kingdom of the Dobrudzha, 
No doubt this state was strongly influenced by the Thracian popula- 
tion of the country. 

A deadly blow was dealt to Scythian expansion beyond the 
Danube, not by the Macedonian monarchs, but by the general 
political situation m Central Europe from the beginning of the third 
century onwards. In 291, when Lysimachus was trying to strengthen 
the northern frontier of his Thracian kingdom, the enemies who 
confronted him on the Danube were not Scythians but Getians. 
This suggests that Scythian power in the steppes between Danube 
and Dniester had sustained a serious reverse, no doubt owing to the 
victorious advance of Celtic and perhaps Germanic tribes, who, about 
this time, began to invade the steppes of South Russia on their way to 
the Black Sea. 

The anarchy which began to prevail in the Russian steppes, as 
the result of this advance of Northern tribes, is attested by the facts 
related in the well-known Oibian decree in honour of Protogenes, 
a rich citizen and merchant of Olbia. The most interesting feature 
of the decree is the evidence which it furnishes as to the attitude of 
the Scythian king Sattapharnes towards Olbia, and the attitude 
of divers petty kings and princes of adjacent tribes towards the same 
city. Their demands for tribute became more and more exacting and 
vexatious. One feels that the little tribes, of different nationality, 
established in the steppes between Dnieper and Bug, Scythians, 
Sandaratians, Thisamatians, were mortally afraid of the advancing 
Galatians and Scirians and were desirous of finding refuge and security 
behind the Oibian city walls, which Protogenes had helped to build. 
The anxiety to complete the fortifications of Olbia shows that condi- 
tions had greatly changed since the fifth, and probably the fourth 
century, when the Scythian dynasts lived peaceably in Olbia and 
built houses and palaces there. 

I must state in passing, in order to avoid misunderstanding, that 
I see no reason to date the Protogenes inscription in the second 
century or even in the second half of the third. Historical as well as 
palaeographical considerations are entirety in favour of an earlier 
date, the beginning of the third century. I also insist on the fact, not 
generally realized, that King Saitapharnes was the great Scythian king 
who retired, before the advance of Northern tribes, towards the seat 
of his power, the steppes in the district of Taurida, It is he who is 
the King pure and simple, the suzerain of the various sceptre-bearers 
(o-KTjTTTot^gt) who are mentioned in the inscription of Protogenes. 

The advance of the Galatians put an end, once and for all, to 


Scythian ascendancy on the banks of the Danube. The survival of 
a Scythian state in the Dobrudzha is explained by the geographical 
situation of the Danube delta, which resembles the delta of the Kuban. 
Have we more precise evidence as to the Scythian occupation of the 
lower Danube valley, its duration, character, and vicissitudes ? 
Unhappily we have not. We do not possess sufficient archaeological 
data, for the archaeological exploration of Bulgaria and Rumania is 
still in its infancy : and the literary tradition does not deal with these 
questions. Recent finds, however, made by chance in one or two 
tumuli in southern Bulgaria, give us a glimpse of the result that may 
be expected from methodical investigation of the tumuli in Bulgaria 
and in Rumania. I need not dwell upon these finds, which have 
lately been published, with a comment ary, by Filov, whose conclu- 
sions I am unable to accept. Unfortunately, he has not taken the 
trouble to make a close study of Russian archaeological material, but 
has contented himself with a few superficial comparisons. Without 
entering into controversy, I shall briefly indicate the nature of these 
finds and the conclusions which I draw from them. The most 
instructive finds are those of Brezovo and of Panagyurishte in the 
department of Philippopolis : after them, of Bedniakovo in the 
department of Chirpan and of Radyuvene in the department of Lovech. 
The objects from the first three places w T ere discovered in tumulary 
graves. Although the graves w T ere not regularly excavated, the 
information which Filov collected locally enables us to form a notion 
of the funerary ritual. It closely resembles the Scythian ritual, and 
particularly that which prevailed on the Dnieper in the fourth and 
third centuries B. C. : an Oriental ritual, but here attenuated and 
unpretentious, compared with that of the great royal tombs by the 
Kuban and the Dnieper. Characteristic, the burial of the body under 
a tumulus in a stone chamber, and the interment, beside the body or 
in the loose earth of the tumulus, of one or more horses with richly 
ornamented bridles. We may conjecture that the bridle was some- 
times laid in the tomb with the body, and the horse slaughtered on 
the half-finished mound. The tomb furniture, also, is very like that 
of the Scythian graves : a group of sacred vessels — chiefly paterae 
and sometimes spherical vases — , amphorae with wine and oil, and 
various drinking vessels, Greek and local ; weapons ; rich garments 
and diadems, loaded with gold ; symbols of power — sceptre and ring ; 
lastly, horse trappings, including a richly ornamented bridle. Just as 
in the Scythian tombs, part of the furniture consists of Greek objects 
imported from Greek colonies, especially Amphipolis, part of local 
imitations of Greek work, and part of purely native objects. These 


similarities cannot all be accidental ; they point to close relations 
between the Scythians and the population of southern Bulgaria, and 
to strong Scythian influence on the natives. But there is more : we 
are astonished to find that the horse trappings are almost the same in 
the Thracian tombs and in the tombs of South Russia, We find the 
samepieces: frontlet, ear-guards, temple-pieces, nasal; the same Oriental 
practice of covering nearly the whole bridle with metal plaques ; the 
same system of bits. Further, the two types of bridle ornament : 
round plaques embossed in the Greek manner; and plaques in the 
form of animals, cast and incised in the Oriental fashion. Lastly, and 
this is the most important of all : all the pieces in the animal style find 
striking parallels in the Scythian horse trappings, from Scythian tombs 
of the fourth and third centuries, which we shall discuss at length in 
the course of this chapter : some of these are almost duplicates. 

Besides these coincidences I may mention the tendency to repro- 
duce local religious scenes on objects made for or by the natives : such 
scenes are the unexplained representation on the horse's frontlet from 
Panagyurishte, and the royal investiture, or holy communion, which 
appears on the Brezovo ring, and is common in objects from fourth- 
or third -century Scythian tombs in South Russia. We shall see that 
this tendency is characteristic of Scythian tombs in the fourth and 
third century, while it is unknown in earlier Scythian graves. 

The tombs of southern Bulgaria were no doubt constructed for 
Thracian kinglets and princes. But it is clear that for their material 
culture these princes were completely dependent upon Greek and 
upon Scythian civilization. The norse trappings cannot all have been 
imported from Scythia : they were probably made in Thrace, but 
certainly after Scythian models. The local craftsman may well have 
introduced one or two alterations of detail, but he has preserved not 
only the principle of Scythian art, but even the features characteristic 
of western Scythia in the fourth and third centuries b, c. I see no 
reason for agreeing with Filov in postulating a parallel development 
of the animal style in Thrace and in Scythia. The Thracian pieces 
are obvious imitations of western Scythian work of the fourth and 
third centuries B.C. 

How can we account for this Scythian influence, which shows 
itself not only in the adoption of the animal style, but also in funerary 
ritual and in political and religious ideas ? I can see only one way. 
The Bulgarian finds all belong to the fourth century B.C. We have 
seen that the fourth century was marked by considerable Scythian 
expansion towards the west, and by the enfeeDlement of the Odrysian 
state, which was no longer supported by Athens, and which was a 

3355 N 


dangerous rival to Macedonia. We must suppose that, profiting by 
these circumstances, the Scythians established themselves firmly on 
the lower Danube, influenced the neighbouring Thracian tribes, and 
probably reduced some of them to vassalage. The Bulgarian excava- 
tions show that the expeditions of Philip and of Zopyrion were only 
the last manifestations of a rivalry which had existed between Macedon 
and Scythia since the collapse of the Odrysian state, and that these 
manifestations presuppose Scythian ascendancy, nominal at least, in 
the regions adjoining Macedonian territory. Can it be presumed, that 
this ascendancy had continued without interruption from the expedi- 
tion of Darius and the Scythian inroad into the Chersonese ? I can 
hardly accept the theory : it is contradicted by what we know of the 
Odrysian kingdom and the anti-Scythian policy of Athens. Further 
and more systematic excavation in Bulgaria ana Rumania will give us 
more definite information. For the present I incline to believe that 
the Scythians, driven back by the Thracians with the aid of Athens 
in the fifth century B.C., resumed the offensive in the fourth, and 
succeeded in asserting supremacy, for some decades at least, over a 
number of Thracian tribes. The reverses suffered by the Scythians 
in the west, during the last years of the fourth century, and the 
pressure of the Sarmatians from the east, forced thern to concentrate 
their efforts in the central and northern part of their state, the land 
on the Dnieper and between Dnieper and Don, including the tribu- 
taries of these rivers and the rich district of Poltava. We have already 
spoken of this country as it was in the neolithic, copper and bronze 
ages: what happened to it in the iron age, immediately before the 
arrival of the Scythians and after their conquest of South Russia ? 

We have seen that as far back as the neolithic period, the 
regions between Dnieper and Bug and farther west were agricultural 
regions. Excavation in the ruins of the fortified settlements which 
are common enough in these parts — for example the excavations of 
Spitsyn in the gorodishche (ruins of a town) or Nemirov in Podolia, 
and those of Cnvojka and of Bobrinskoy in the districts of Kiev and 
of Poltava — and archaeological investigations in the adjacent ceme- 
teries, have shown .that the conditions remained the same, even at the 
period when the mixed civilization of the tribes which brought the 
spiral and maeander pottery and of those which constructed tumulary 
graves with contracted skeletons, gave place to an iron age civiliza- 
tion, probably introduced by conquering tribes. It was these tribes 
who first acquainted the western part of South Russia with the 
use of iron weapons, in shapes which remind one of the Hallstatt 
culture, for instance, the sword with antennae, and with a quite 


distinctive pottery which cannot be connected either with the spiral 
and maeancer ware, or with the pottery of the graves with contracted 

Clay V5vses of indigenous fabrication from 
the Middle Dnieper 7-fCENT. bx. 

Fig. 9. 

skeletons. The pots are of black clay, with incised ornament filled in 
with white : the ornament is exclusively geometric and is very primi- 
tive. The commonest and most typical shape is a cup with a big 
handle which is sometimes homed (fig. o). This pottery recalls, 


most of all, the Bronze Age pottery of Hungary, also Trojan pottery 
of the so-called Cimmerian period, and the Hallstatt pottery of 
Central Europe. Unfortunately it has never been properly studied, 
although the Russian archaeological museums are full of it and the 
most interesting varieties have frequently been published. 

The graves and settlements distinguished by iron weapons and 
the pottery just described are usually attributed to the Scythians : 
wrongly in my opinion. We have seen the culture brought with them 
by the Scythians : a mixed culture, purely nomadic and purely 
Oriental. In the eastern part of the Russian steppes, the tombs yield 
neither iron weapons of Hallstatt type, nor pottery of the kind described 
above. It is true that purely Scythian graves have been discovered in 
the steppes between Dnieper and Bug, for example the grave in a 
tumulus excavated by Metgun6v in the eighteenth century, which 
presents notable affinity with the finds at Kelermes. But these are 
exceptions. The majority of the graves in this region belong to a 
different type, both in structure and in contents (fig. 10). There is 
a certain superficial resemblance between the purely Scythian graves 
and those of the Dnieper region, which has misled scholars into 
ascribing the Dnieper graves to the Scythians. In both groups we 
have tumuli, and wooden structures under the tumuli. But in the 
Russian steppes, the tumulus, as a grave monument, does not begin 
in the Scythian period : it is much older : and the wooden funerary 
structure in the basin of the Dnieper is quite different from that on 
the Kuban. It is not a nomadic tent, but a farmer's house, a c khata *, 
made of planks and tree- trunks : it is not imitated from the type used 
in the nomadic graves, but derived from the type current in the 
district as early as the copper age. The funerary ritual of these graves 
differs from that of the Kuban basin in several essential points. 
There is no trace of hecatombs of horses, or of human sacrifice. 
The furniture of the tumulary graves in the Dnieper region, from the 
sixth to the fourth century, is rich and varied, ana of a mixed descrip- 
tion, just as in the Kuban graves. But the general aspect is very 
different from that of the Kuban tumuli. First of all, w r e must notice 
that the Dnieper graves are not exclusively those of ruling warriors, 
of nomadic chiefs : there are rich and poor graves, large and small. 
That implies a different social system. 

Again, the tomb furniture is not composed of the same elements 
on the Dnieper as on the Kuban. To judge from the excavations in 
the settlements and in the oldest graves, Greek influence set in long 
before Oriental influence, that is, long before the Scythian conquest. 
In the deepest, oldest strata of the settlements between Dnieper 


and Dniester, we regularly find heaps of native potsherds mingled 
with less numerous fragments of Greek seventh -century vases ; also 
weapons and objects in bronze, iron and precious metal, of Hallstatt 
type : but no articles of Oriental origin. So likewise in the oldest 
so-called Scythian graves in the Dnieper region. Unfortunately; these 
graves have never been carefully studied and arranged in chrono- 
logical order. The task is a difficult one, and I cannot undertake it 
here : it could only be executed on the spot, above all in the great 
archaeological museum of Kiev. But to judge from the reports 
published by Bobrinskoy, Brandenburg, Samofcvasov and Chvojka, 

Sections & Plan of a (Jrave on the Middle Dnieper 

Fjg, 10. 

and from the objects reproduced in the works of Bobrinskoy and 
Khanenko, it seems that the oldest graves in the Kiev region do not 
differ from the oldest strata of the settlements, that is to say, they 
present the same mixture of Greek and Hallstatt objects. 

The uniform culture of the eighth and seventh centuries B.C. 
changes towards the end of the seventh century and even more in the 
sixth. We find at this period, in the steppes of western Russia, certain 
graves of purely Oriental type which resemble those of the Kuban 
region. I have already spoken of them. Again, in the common graves, 
side by side with Greek and Hallstatt things, which are still very 
plentiful, there are products of Oriental art and Industry, some of them 
decorated in the animal style. Towards the end of the sixth century, 



these products become more and more frequent, but in the fifth 
century they are gradually ousted by objects imported from Greece. 
But the staple of the furniture remains native. Down to the fourth 
century B. c, native pottery predominates and Halls tatt weapons 
outnumber Greek and Scythian, 

The predominance of native and Hellenic elements in the west is 
an extremely characteristic and important feature. We have found 
nothing like it in the region of the Kuban, where the material culture 
of the native was completely absorbed, first by Oriental, and then by 
Greek civilization. 

One is tempted to ask, whether racial difference may not account 
for the difference of archaeological aspect. What was the nationality 
of the tribes with the black pottery and the Halls tatt weapons ? 
From the parallels which we have adduced, western South Russia would 
appear to have been closely connected, in material culture, with the 

Eortions of Europe and of Asia Minor peopled, both then and in the 
iter neolithic and the copper ages, by Thracians, It was conceivably 
tribes of Thracian stock which invaded the western steppes of Russia, 
perhaps for the second time, in the iron age. But I prefer to abstain 
from ill-founded hypotheses. We must wait until Rumanian, Bul- 
garian and Serbian scholars can give us more methodical information 
as to the prehistory of the central and northern parts of the Balkan 

Meanwhile we have a consistent picture : the continuous evolu- 
tion of a distinctive material civilization in the western portion of the 
Russian steppes : a powerful native civilization, in touch with the 
Greeks from the seventh century onwards, and an Oriental element 
which becomes more and more prominent from the end of the seventh 
century and the beginning of the sixth. 

This archaeological picture accords very well with the historical 
data quoted above. It is clear that from the seventh to the fourth 
century the sovereignty of the Scythians in the western part of their 
empire was neither very powerful nor very oppressive. It made little 
alteration in the social and economic order which prevailed on the 
Dnieper and the Bug before the arrival of the Scythians. The 
Scythians no doubt contented themselves with exacting tribute from 
the conquered peoples and repressing their attempts to regain their 
freedom. The tribute from the agricultural districts, and the furs 
delivered by the hunters in the forests, enabled the conquerors to 
conduct a profitable traffic with the Greek city of Olbia. The centre 
of Scythian ascendancy did not He in the western part of the kingdom. 
Being nomads, the Scythians needed the freedom of the steppes, for 



their cattle, and for their military training : hunting, wild rides, and 
warlike exercises. We have seen that their centre, from the sixth to 
the fourth century, was somewhere in the steppes between Dnieper 
and Don, probably near the coast of the Sea of Azov. 

In the Fourth century, the events which I have already mentioned 
considerably modified the circumstances of the Scythian state, driving 
it westward and northward. I have spoken of the Scythian advance 
towards the west : we must now turn to the archaeological evidence 
as to the organization of the principal part of the Scythian empire, the 
part between Don and Dnieper, especially along the Dnieper and its 
tributaries, after these events, that is to say in the fourth and third 
centuries B.C. 

When archaeologists began to explore the tumuli, often of enor- 
mous size, in the region east and west of the lower Dnieper, they were 
dazzled by the magnificence of these truly regal sepulchres. So rich 
were the tumuli of Chertomlyk, of Alexandropol, of the Tsymbalka; 
the Ogiiz, Deev and Chmyreva barrows ; the Serog6zy and Znamenka 
groups ; and, above all, the now famous tumulus of Soldkha, and the 
tumulus explored by myself in Count Mordvinov's estate, the Black 
Valley, Chernay Dolina : that explorers were led to identify this 
whole vast region with the half-mythical locality of Gerrhoi, mentioned 
more than once by Herodotus. But quite apart from the question, 
whether Gerrhoi was a real place at all, the chronology of these tumuli 
was not taken into account. I maintain, and I have often essayed to 
prove, that they form a chronological unit, that they all belong to the 
same period, that none of them is earlier than the end of the fourth 
century or later than the second half of the third, a period of a hundred 
years more or less, I cannot repeat all my arguments : I will indicate 
them briefly. 

The unity of the group is proved by the following facts : first, the 
type of sepulchral structure is the same ; secondly, the funerary ritual 
is the same ; thirdly, the composition of the tomb furniture is almost 
identical ; fourthly, the style of the objects is the same ; fifthly, 
duplicates are often found in different tombs, especially duplicates of 
the gold plaques sewn on to garments : the plaques were produced 
and sold in large quantities. 

The chronology of the group has been hotly disputed. According 
to some scholars, some of the tombs date from the fifth century : 
Farmakovski and others place some of them in the second century B. c. 
Both dates are impossible. Comparison of the contents with dated 
objects, especially of the garment plaques with the Greek coins from 
which they were imitated ; analysis of the pottery found in some of the 



graves ; and other considerations which I cannot specify here, lead 
me to place the whole group at the end of the fourth and the beginning 
of the third century. 

Now if I am right, if the whole group is much later than Herodotus, 
it is not possible to identify the region with Herodotus' Gerrhoi. In 
the period between the sixth and fourth centuries, Gerrhoi, as I have 
already pointed out, must have been situated farther east, correspond- 
ing to the political centre of the Scythian kingdom in the time of 
Herodotus. On the other hand, ours are certainly royal sepulchres. 
They can only have belonged to members of the dynasty of the great 
Scythian kings. They prove that in the fourth and third centuries 
b. c. the political centre of the Scythian empire was no longer where 
we supposed it to have been from the sixth to the fourth century, but 
farther to the west, nearer to the Dnieper on one side and the Crimea 
on the other. The transference can easily be accounted for by the 
events to which I have alluded above. Forced to concentrate west 
and north, especially north, the Scythians moved westwards, with 
their capital covering the route to the Crimea, their last refuge in case 
of retreat. Their main task was to command the Dnieper and to 
keep in contact with their northern provinces : otherwise they 
would have nothing to sell to the Greeks. It was impossible to 
command the Dnieper without bringing their political and military 
head-quarters nearer the river and disposing their armed forces along 
its banks. If they remained concentrated on the Sea of Azov, they 
could not face attacks delivered from the west and aimed at the wealthy 
agricultural regions on the middle and lower Dnieper and the popu- 
lated nuclei in that district, including Olbia. Nor could they pursue 
an active policy on the Bug, the Dniester and the Danube, unless 
they moved their main forces in that direction. 

The archaeological and historical considerations, which lead me to 
postulate a transference of the Scythian centre to the lower Dnieper 
and the approach to the Crimea, are confirmed by further archaeo- 
logical evidence. We have seen that, during the period in which the 
Scythian centre lay in the eastern part of the steppes between Dnieper 
and Don, Scythian culture exercised comparatively little influence 
on the region of the Dnieper, But from the fourth or third century 
onwards, the aspect of things alters appreciably in this part of the 
Scythian state. Henceforward, on the middle course of the Dnieper 
and westward in the fertile country between Dnieper and Bug, as 
well as in the regions east of the Dnieper, on its eastern tributaries, 
the Sula, the Psel, the Vorskla (the district of Poltava) as far as the 
middle course of the Don (the district of Vordnezh), we find a goodly 


number of purely Scythian graves, belonging to the same period and 
presenting the same characteristics as the already-mentioned graves 
on the lower Dnieper and in Taurida, The large and sumptuous 
tombs of Ryzhanovka, of Darievka, of Ilyintsy, of Novoselki, in the 
districts of Kiev and Podolia j a number of tombs in the great tumu- 
lary cemeteries belonging to the native settlements — big fortified 
towns — of Romny ; finally, the tumulary cemeteries of the middle 
Don : all these recall, feature by feature, the kurgans of the lower 
Dnieper and of Taurida, The ancient funerary ritual of the natives 
is still retained, but considerably modified by the purely Scythian 
ritual. Even the traditional wooden structure is sometimes abandoned, 
and replaced by the tomb-chambers of the lower Dnieper. Horses 
are now sacrificed : the funeral car appears, the canopy, the canopy- 
poles with rattles atop surmounted by figures of animals and of deities. 
At the same time the tomb furniture also changes. There is no longer I 
any native pottery, and hardly any weapons of Hallstatt type. The 
whole furniture assumes a marked Oriental character, and the Greek 
objects imported from Olbia give place to objects which seem, as I 
shall show at the end of this chapter, to have been produced in Panti- 
capaeum. Particularly characteristic is the repetition, in both groups of 
graves, of the same types of caparison plaque. It is important to 
notice, that on the middle Dnieper, in Poltava and in Voronezh, the 
plaques are always imitations, sometimes very coarse, of the plaques 
on the lower Dnieper : we found the same in Bulgaria. Still more 
characteristic : some of the objects from this area are duplicates of 
objects found in the Crimea and on the lower Dnieper ; thus a replica 
of the celebrated Chertomtyk gorytus was found at Ilyintsy. Gold 
garment-plaques, from tumuli in the districts of Kiev and Poltava, 
find counterparts, made from fellow dies, on the lower Dnieper. 
The habit, which distinguishes, as we shall see, our group of tombs, 
of decorating artistic objects with scenes from Scythian life, and^ of 
adorning jewels with figures of local deities, is general in the region 
which we are studying. Take the silver vase from the Voronezh 
tomb, decorated with scenes from Scythian camp-life : it is not a 
duplicate of the famous electrum vase from Kul-Oba, but it obviously 
originated in the same artistic area. Take the earrings from another 
tomb in Voronezh, with figures of the great local goddess ; certainly 
native work, but imitated from Panticapaean models. Take the silver 
plaque from the same tomb. Take, lastly, the cold ornaments from 
the tiara of the lady buried at Ryzhanovka, which find exact parallels 
at Chertorntyk and elsewhere. 

These resemblances cannot be fortuitous. We cannot but recognize 

3353 o 


that in the fourth and third centuries, the Scythians endeavoured to 
install themselves, as a ruling class, in the northern regions of their 
empire, to transform their suzerainty into a real domination, and to 
extend that domination as far as possible to the north. It will not be 
denied that this Scythian expansion, hitherto unnoticed, is an historical 
fact of the first importance, for it must be remembered, that the middle 
Dnieper, with Kiev, was the cradle of the great Slavonic state from 
w r hich modern Russia sprang. 

These archaeological data agree most admirably with the history 
of the Scythian state from the fourth to the third centuries b. c, as I 
have set it forth above. I will repeat my conclusions. Weakened in 
the east, the Scythian power tried to extend westward and northward. 
Its western conquests broke dowTi under the pressure of die Mace- 
donians and the Thracians, and the Gallo-German invasion created 
a very difficult situation in the steppes between Danube and Dnieper. 
But the Scythians maintained themselves between Dnieper and Don, 
and were able to wield vigorous sway in the adjoining regions north- 
ward, on the middle Dnieper and the middle Don. Not for long, 
however. Towards the second half of the third century, the Sarma- 
tians crossed the Don and advanced on the Dnieper ; the Scythian 
provinces on the middle Dnieper fell into anarchy and were partially 
invaded by Germanic and perhaps Slavonic tribes. The Scythians 
w r ere driven back into the Crimea and towards the shores of the 
Black Sea, they were confined within narrow limits and reduced 
to comparative indigence. The great Scythian empire collapsed 
for ever. 

Nevertheless the fourth and third centuries were a period of great 
prosperity for the Scythian state. The loss of the eastern provinces was 
counterbalanced by acquisitions in the west and by the strengthening 
of Scythian power in the agricultural region of the middle Dnieper 
and the middle Don. Scythian trade nourished. It must not be 
forgotten, that this period corresponds to the great conquests of 
Alexander and the formation of the Hellenistic states. In an era of 
political expansion, which witnessed the development of a really 
world-wide trade and the creation and amplification of a modem 
industrial system, the Greek w r orld needed enormous quantities of 
food-stufFs and of raw material. The supplies were absorbed eagerly, 
and gladly paid for with the gold which Alexander had brought from 
conquered Persia and put into circulation. No wonder, therefore, 
that the period of Scythian political decay was a period of great 
material prosperity. It was not otherwise in the Greek cities on the 
Black Sea. The kingdom of the Bosphorus, as we have already seen, 





























































was never so flourishing as at this time. Even Olbia, which passed 
through many anxious hours, remained rich, although wealth passed 
more and more into the hands of one or two families, like that of 
Heroson and Protogenes : these families succeeded in equipping a 
fleet which was sufficiently large and powerful to give them the mono- 
poly of the Scythian trade. Read the inscription of Protogenes, and 
similar inscriptions from the Greek cities on the western shore of the 
Black Sea, and you will be astonished by the great wealth of certain 
families, and by the poverty of the city itself, crushed by debts and 

It is therefore not surprising that in this period of political decay, 
the Scythian tombs are full of gold and silver, of superb works of art, 
of jewels and of precious stones. Apart from the sixth century, the 
Scythian tombs were never so rich as in the fourth and third cen- 
turies B. c. 

These graves are not essentially different from the Kuban graves : 
the same type of nomad chieftain s tomb, the same stately ritual, the 
same heavy profusion of gold, silver, and other precious objects. 
There are modifications, however, due to various geographical and 
economic causes. First of all, the structure beneath the tumulus is no 
longer of wood : it is replaced by a chamber or chambers dug in virgin 
soil inside the walls of the sepulchral trench (figs. 1 1 , 12), The change 
was undoubtedly occasioned by the lark of forests in the immediate 
neighbourhood of the steppes adjoining the Crimea. Again, horses 
are no longer slaughtered in great numbers. It is clear that owing to 
agricultural development in the riverine and coastal districts it became 
more difficult to keep large herds of horses ; their value increased, 
and oxen were preferred for the purpose of sacrifice. It was now 
considered sufficient, to slaughter the horses which drew the funeral 
car, and the dead man's parade horses : in the poorer graves, the 
sacrifice was merely simulated, by the interment of the horse's bridle. 
Lastly, under the single tumulus, not one, but two sepulchral chambers 
were made, one subsequently to the other, the second always after 
the construction of the tumulus. The second chamber sometimes 
accommodates a woman : but by no means regularly. In the Solokha 
kurgan, the additional chamber was reserved for a man, who was 
buried with enormous wealth beside him (figs. 11-13). 

With these exceptions, the funerary ritual remains the same. The 
funeral cars, the canopies with poles crowned by rattles and figures 
of animals and deities, the bells on the canopies, the funeral repast, 
the sacrifice of servants and of horses : all these are found on the 
Dnieper as on the Kuban. 



The tomb furniture is no less rich, perhaps richer, than in the 
period between the sixth and fourth centuries. The contents of the 
Kul-Oba tumulus?, mentioned in my first chapter, are well known and 
have often been published. It is typical tomb furniture of the period. 

Fie. ii. 

To give an idea of the wealth of such furniture, I shall enumerate 
the objects which were buried with the dead in the lateral grave at 
SoIokha(ng. 13) and which recur, with slight modifications, in all the 
tombs of our group. Arms : two swords, one with gold-plated sheath 
and guard; a quiver plated with silver gilt (pi. XXI, i); a bronze 
helmet ; a scale corslet of bronze ; bronze greaves ; a number of 
copper weapons or sceptres. Ornaments : a gold tore, a necklace or 




Ar — 



t / 




J 3 3 4 5 




Fjc 12, 




chain of gold tubes, with gold pendants, five bracelets of solid gold, 
more than three hundred gold garment-plaques ; a solid ^pld comb 
(pi. XIX). Vessels : a gold patera (pi. XX, 3), seven silver vases 
(pi. XX, 1, 2), some wooden vases plated with gold, three large copper 
cauldrons, and several amphorae for wine or oil. 

Still richer were the tombs of Chertomtyk and of Alexandropol, 
and those of the Chmyreva Mogila and of the Serogozy group : for 
not only the king's grave but the queen's grave was found as well. 
The jewels worn by the women were extremely rich and various, and 
usually very heavy and costly. Their festal costume was loaded with 
gold, especially the great conical tiara, of Irano-Greek type, which I 
have lately reconstructed by means of fragments from a number of 
different graves. 

We must notice that nearly all these objects were artistic works 
covered with figures and ornaments in relief : sometimes artistic w T orks 
of the highest order. Let us compare the funeral inventory with that 
of the Scythian tombs on the Kuban. The superficial aspect has not 
altered. Side by side with pure Greek work, made for Greeks but 
sold to Scythians, a series of Greek objects made for Scythians, and 
a series w T hich seems pure Scythian, especially some jewels, the bridle 
decoration, the ornaments of the funeral canopies, and those of the 
funeral cars. But if we look more closely we detect a notable change, 
particularly in the second class of products. We have seen that as 
early as the fifth century, Greek artists adapted themselves to Scythian 
taste, fashioned for them weapons and ornaments of regular Scythian 
type, and endeavoured to please them by decorating these articles in 
the animal style which the Scythians loved. But while they thus 
consulted the taste of their customers, they remained Greeks. They 
ennobled the shapes, and they partly substituted the animal style of 
Asia Minor for the Scythian. But their art remained purely decorative : 
religious subjects are rarely found, and that only on pure Greek 
objects brought to the Russian steppes by chance. 

In the fourth and third centuries there is a significant change. 
There is still importation from Iranian lands : for instance, one of 
the Chertoml^k swords, and some engraved gems . But most of the 
objects are the work of Greek artists. They still produced the 
same kind of weapons and ornaments. But the mode of decoration 
is quite different. The animal style is no longer predominant, but 
confined to subsidiary positions, Scenes with figures now prevail : 
and strange scenes 1 Partly representations from Greek mythology, 
taken aimost at random from the plentiful repertory of the Greeks, 
and employed, more or less successfully, to decorate surfaces for which 



f * 



; 1 





.-v- . -? :^ -:? 

# ^ K^^ CHAMBER 

an o 











c S 








r i T 

C'-'t J.< -■ pi .m ■ .1 j ,i , IJ...I. ±J..-„,u [ I '. MM ■ x . , l 1 | .."lt "v 


Fro. 13. 


the originals were never intended : examples are the celebrated gorytus 
of Chertomtyk, a replica of which has lately been discovered at Ilyintsy, 
and one of the sword-sheaths from the same tumulus. But the 
great majority of the objects are decorated with subjects which are 
completely new to Greek art, subjects borrowed from the religious 
and social life of the Scythians themselves. The scenes are studied 
in every detail. The minute rendering of Scythian costume and 
equipment corresponds exactly to the originals found in the tombs. 
The religious scenes are so peculiar, and so foreign to Greek ideas, 
that we must accept their correctness a priori. Some of them are 
like illustrations to Herodotus. The scenes from social life are 
slightly idealized, the types also. Here we can trace the Stoic tendency 
of Ephorus, who desired to substitute, for the real Scythians, Scythians 
idealized according to Stoic theory. But the idealization does not go 
very far. One can see that the Scythians themselves, under Greek 
influence, wished the Greek artists to provide them with objects 
reproducing Scythian scenes : scenes from their religious, from their 
economic and social life. Precious documents for reconstructing the 
life and the religion of the Scythians : let us try to profit by them, as 
briefly as we can. 

The religious scenes are mainly concerned with Scythian ideas 
about the connexion of the royal power with divinity. The chief 
subject is the rite of the holy communion, a rite which occurs later 
in the Irano-Fontic cult of Mithra, and which played a considerable 
part in the Christian religion. On the rhyton from Karagodeuashkh, 
we see the supreme god offering the holy communion to the king, 
by means of a rhyton rilled with the sacred drink. Both king and god 
are represented on horseback, like the god Mithra on a number of 
Pontic coins and sculptures : under their horses* feet they trample 
the prostrate bodies of their enemies, the forces of evil : a valuable 
instance of the dualism of the Iranian religion. It is important to 
observe, that the same subject recurs, six centuries later, on Sassanid 
gems. Still more interesting, that the holy communion reappears on 
a great many other monuments, in which the administering divinity 
is not the great god Ahuramazda, but the Great Goddess whom we 
may call Anaitis. In the queen's grave at Karagodeuashkh, a scene like 
that on the rhyton is figured on the great triangular gold plaque which 
adorned the front of the ritual tiara (pi. XXIII, i). The goddess is seated 
on a throne, clad in a heavy ceremonial garment, and wearing a tiara on 
her head : behind her are two priestesses with their heads veiled. 
A young Scythian noble, no doubt a prince, approaches the goddess 
on the right, and she offers him the holy communion in a rhyton, j On 


I. 'CORYTOS" (bow and arrows case) covered with silver, from the 

'Solokha* tumulus. IV Cent. B.C. Hermitage, Pctrograd 

a, 3- SILVER AMPHORAE from the 'Chertomljk ' tumulus (lower Dnieper) 


the other side, a strange figure, a beardless man clad in a woman's 
garment, advances towards the goddess with a round vase, probably 
containing the sacred beverage, in his right hand : he must be a 
servant of the goddess, a priest : his facial features and his costume 
suggest that he is a eunuch. Now Herodotus states that among the 
Scythian aristocracy there was a special class of persons who were 
afflicted with a mysterious malady ; they changed their male clothing 
for female and consecrated themselves to the worship of the goddess : 
Herodotus calls them Enareans. Whatever the cause of the malady, 
whether that alleged by the pseudo-Hippocrates, or another, we may 
take it that the Enareans fulfilled the same function among the 
Scythians, in the worship of the Great Goddess, mother of gods, 
of men and of animals, as the eunuchs elsewhere. Above the com- 
munion scene is a figure of a god in a chariot ; the type is influenced 
by the type of Helios, but the god, unless I am mistaken, is the great 
Iranian sun-god, the Sol Mithra of the Roman Empire. Lastly, in 
the uppermost row is a figure of a Greek Tyche which I should identify 
with the Iranian Hvarcno. Whether my interpretation of the two 
upper rows be right or wrong, the scene in the lower row is certainly 
a religious one. The same scene is reproduced, over and over again, 
on the gold garment- plaques in the tumuli of our group (pL XXIII, 4). 
A kind of contamination of the scenes on the rhyton ot Karagodeu- 
ashkh and on the tiara is engraved on a rhyton from a tomb near the 
village of Merdjany, where the king, on horseback, is receiving the 
holy communion from a goddess seated on a throne and holding 
the round sacred vessel in her hands, while the king holds the rhyton 
(pi. XXIII, 2). An interesting detail is the sacred spike with a horse's 
skull on it, which stands near the goddess, indicating the sacrifice of 
horses to her. 

It is very important to notice, that the same religious and political 
conceptions found their way into Thrace, part of which, as we have 
seen, was ruled by Scythian conquerors in the fourth century. Among 
the objects, already mentioned, from Brezovo in southern Bulgaria, 
is a gold ring engraved with the counterpart of the Merdjany repre- 
sentation : a king on horseback receiving the holy communion, in a 
rhyton, from the goddess standing in front of him. 

A similar subject appears on the gilded silver rhyton found at 
Poroina in Rumania and published by Odobesco. It has the same 
sturdy proportions, and terminates in the same massive bull's head, 
as another rhyton, found at Contzesti in Rumania, and now preserved 
in the Hermitage, together with other objects from the same place, 
including a sceptre resembling that of Brezovo. Both sides of the 

*5S3 P 



Poroina rhyton are ornamented with figures in relief. We see the 
same goddess seated on a stool, holding the round vase in her right 
hand, and in her left a rhyton of the same shape as the Poroina rhyton 
itself. Facing the goddess is a priestess or worshipper raising her 
right hand in the gesture of adoration. The scene is given twice, on 
the upper part of each side. It is not possible to date the rhyton : 
it is unquestionably the work of a native artist, and consequently 
barbarous in style. One would be inclined to consider it much later 
than the Merdjany rhyton, which can be dated, by the objects found 
along with it, in the third century b. c. ; but the style of the repre- 
sentations on the Merdjany rhyton, if one can speak of style in such 
uncouth works, does not differ from that of the Poroina rhyton. It 
must also be noticed, that the goddess who adorns the centre of the 
famous Petrossa phiale seems to be closely akin to the Great Goddess 
worshipped by the Scythians of South Russia. 

This whole series of religious representations shows the sacred 
character of the vases which are regularly found in Scythian tombs of 
our period : the round vase and the rhyton, two very primitive forms 
which go back to the earliest stages of civilized life. The two 
Scythians on the girdle or diadem from the barrow of Kul-Oba, 
one of whom bears the rhyton, the other the round vase, must be 
devotees of the supreme goddess. 

We are now in a position to understand the ceremony of the 
sacred oath, described by Herodotus (iv. 70) : * When the Scythians 
make a treaty, they pour wine into a great clay cup, and the parties 
prick themselves with a needle or cut themselves with a sword, and 
mingle their blood with the wine ; and they dip into the cup a scimitar, 
and arrows, and a battle-axe, and a javelin. Then they pronounce 
a long curse, and they drink, the parties, and their principal followers/ 
This is the same ceremony of holy communion. It was reproduced 
on the clasp (?) of the Kul-Oba girdle or diadem, mentioned above 
(pi. XXIII, 3) : the representation included the figures of Scythians 
with round vase and rhyton, taking part in the ceremony described 
by Herodotus. Many such figures have been found and are to be 
seen in museums : they were set to left and right of the central 
group, the Holy Communion, on the girdle or dtadem. The same 
subject occurs in the Solokha tumulus, on gold plaques attached to 
the clothing of the king. 

In Scythian religion the great cod has been almost totally eclipsed 
by the Great Goddess, It is she who is the great divinity, the 
divinity above all others. It is she who presides at oath- taking, who 
administers the holy communion, and who initiates the royal Scythians 



1 V III Cent. B. c* HeruiitHgc, Pcirogtad 



into the masteries of her religion. We have observed the part which 
she played in the religion of the Maeotians and of the Sauromatians : 
we have mentioned her temples in the Taman peninsula. At Panti- 
capaeum, as we shall find, she became the chief goddess of the 
Bosphoran state in the Roman period. But we have just seen that 
she was deeply venerated by the Scythians as well. What can be 
the reason ? Did the Scythians bring the cult with them from their 
eastern homeland ? It is possible, nay probable. But the develop- 
ment and prominence of the cult can only be accounted for by 
supposing that here, as in Asia Minor, the Iranians inherited the 
worship of the Great Goddess from the native population, that it was 
the primitive worship of the natives. This view is confirmed by the 
list of Scythian deities in Herodotus (iv. 59) : * they worship these 
deities and no others : first, Histie, after her Zeus and Ge, then Apollo 
and Heavenly Aphrodite, Herakles and Ares/ Later he says : * they 
call Histie in their tongue Tahiti, and Zeus, I think, Papaios, Ge Api, 
Apollo Gaitosyros, Heavenly Aphrodite Argimpasa, Poseidon Thagi- 
masadas.* At first sight it is strange to find, in a list of Iranian 
divinities, a goddess with the un-Iranian name of Tahiti occupying 
the highest place, while the supreme god has the second place only. 
But it is not surprising on the hypothesis which I have formulated. 
Herodotus' list is a mixed one, a list of the divinities who were revered 
by the native population primarily, the neighbours of the city of Olbia. 
We can understand, therefore, that the Great Goddess should be 
mentioned first, and after her a god with a name which is Thracian 
rather than Iranian, Papaios. 

The Scythian legends collected by Herodotus corroborate my 
theory. Remember the story of the autochthonous goddess of the 
Dnieper region, half -woman, half-serpent, who dwelt in a woodland 
cave near the mouth of the Dnieper. Herakles, the conquering god, 
had to come to terms with her, and she bore him the three eponymous 
heroes of the peoples in the Russian and Thracian plain, the Gelo- 
nians, the Agathyrsians and the Scythians. The legend reflects the 
history of the country. Conquerors who were servants of a warrior 
god ; and a native population devoted to the worship of an earth 
goddess, a serpent goddess. It is worth noticing that a similar tale 
was current in Sakastan : the part of Herakles is played by the hero 
and demi-god Rostahm. The legend reported by Herodotus is 
confirmed by the archaeological monuments. The same group of 
tumuli, those of the fourth and third centuries B.C., have furnished 
several representations of a serpent-footed goddess : she appears on 
the horse's frontlet from Tsymbalka ; on gold garment - plaques 


(pi. XVIII, 4, and p. 130, fig. 17); and in plaster on Panticapaean 
coffins of the Roman period* The serpent-footed goddess is an old 
Ionian type, a variant of Medusa. It is rare in archaic Ionian monu- 
ments : I know but two examples, an archaic vase-handle of bronze 
in the Museum at Nimes, its fellow in the British Museum, and 
a well-preserved archaic vase, with the same kind of handles, in Berlin , 
But the type was adapted by Greek artists to the beliefs of the 
Scythian and Maeotian tribes, and became extremely popular in the 
Russian steppes and nowhere else. 

To conclude our survey of the religious scenes, I will mention the 
plaques representing the Great Goddess accompanied by her sacred 
animals, the raven and the dog (pi. XXIII, 5), and the plaque with 
a wrestling contest between two Scythians, no doubt in honour of the 
same deity (pi. XXIII, 6). In a word : we see that in the hands of 
Greek artists, the aniconic Iranian religion , as described by Herodotus, 
becomes peopled with divine images, created by the Greek artists 
and no doubt accepted by the Scythian devotee. In creating these 
images, the artists seem to have been inspired by very ancient repre- 
sentations of Oriental divinities, such as the seated goddess with a vase 
in her hand, a type which is found in Babylonia from the remotest 

Let us now pass to social and economic life. The warlike activity 
of the ruling class was a favourite subject with the artists who worked 
for the Scythians. Battle scenes are common everywhere : fights 
between Scythians and their enemies, Scythians of other tribes, 
Thracians, Maeotians : enough to cite the Solokha comb (pi. XIX) 
and the gorytus from the same grave (pi. XXI, 1). Hare-hunts, 
and hunting in general (pi. XX, 1,2), are no less frequent : this 
was the most usual form of sport among the Scythians : it trained 
them to hit a moving adversary at full gallop. More interesting are 
the scenes on two spherical vases ; one, of silver, from Voronezh, the 
other, of electrum, from Kul-Oba. The scene on the Voronezh vase 
is a peaceful one : Scythian warriors in conference ; an old warrior 
instructing a youth in the use of the bow, the principal weapon of the 
Scythians ; a Scythian camp on the eve of an expedition. The Kul- 
Oba vase (pi. XXII) shows the same camp after the battle : the 
king receiving a report from a messenger, wounded warriors attended 
by their comrades — a leg- wound being dressed, an operation for a 
mouth wound. Both vases are interesting for their style and their 
inspiration : they provide, as it were, illustrations to the account of 
Ephorus, who was the first to idealize the Scythian social system, as 
an example of communism on a democratic basis : the same motive 


recurs in the Scythian dialogues of Lucian. The two scenes might 
be described as realistic idylls in the manner of Theocritus. It must 
be remembered that they are the oldest Greek monuments which 
attempt to give realistic illustrations corresponding to the ethno- 
graphical treatises which were especially common about the time of 
Alexander the Great. 

I should like to conclude this series of racial representations 
with the famous Chertomlyk vase (pi. XXI, 2), Once more the 
Scythian camp on the eve of battle. The warriors are scattered over 
the steppe, catching the horses which they will ride on the morrow. 
I shall not dwell upon the artistic power with which the artist has 
seized the type of the horses (pi. XX I, 3), of the Scythian warriors, 
and even of the landscape/ The whole atmosphere is that of the 
Russian steppe : the artist must have known the steppe, must have 
studied the life of a Scythian camp, and must have been thoroughly 
well-acquainted with the little horse of the steppes, dry and muscular, 
quite unlike the horses of Greece or of Asia Minor. The Chertomlyk 
vase is a masterpiece, even compared with the vases of Voronezh and 
Kul-Oba, which must belong to the same artistic school. 

What was the artistic school that created these marvels of realistic, 
slightly idyllic art, an art which devoted itself almost entirely to the 
study of a nation, and which was able to catch the characteristic 
features of a national life ? The artists cannot possibly have been 
Athenians : Athens produced nothing similar, and the nature of 
Athenian art w f as opposed to such ethnographical realism. Artists 
of Asia Minor ? But where could they have obtained their profound 
knowledge of Scythian life, of Scythian religion, and of the Russian 
steppe ? Impossible for artists residing at Ephesus, at Miletus, nay, 
at Cyzicus ; even supposing that they had visited Russia. But why 
go so far afield ? Have we not admired the masterpieces of Greek 
toreutic produced at Panticapaeum, particularly the gold and silver 
coins of the fourth century (pi. XVIII, 5) ? Compare the three-quarter 
face of the old silen with the head of the Scythian whose teeth 
are being operated upon, compare the silen 's head in profile with 
the profile head of the Scythian on the Solokha gorytus, compare the 
beardless heads of the young satyr with the young Scythians on the 
same, compare, finally, the realistic horse on the silver didrachms of 
the third century with the horses on the Chertomlyk vase. Is the 
style not the same ; a style derived from Scopaic art, a forerunner of 
the style of Pergamon ? Nowhere will you find more striking and 
more convincing analogies. This is the clawn of Hellenistic art, the 
art which we find later in the Hellenistic kingdoms; which was 


influenced by the interest taken by science and literature in the hitherto 
barbarian peoples who were now entering into the great family of 
civilized , that is, Ilellenized nations ; which, like the idylls of 
Theocritus and the mimes of Herodas, was at once idyllic and 
realistic. An art which was glad to place itself at the disposal of 
foreign nations, and which gave birth to new masterpieces of pure 
Greek type, inspired, however, by the strange and exotic spectacle 
of a life both foreign and familiar to the artists. 

One more reason for insisting on the Panticapaean origin of the 
artistic objects found in the tumuli of this group, is the geographical 
distribution of the tumuli themselves. The tumuli which lie nearest 
Panticapaeum are likewise the richest in artistic objects of Bosphoran 
work. One of the most splendid is the barrow of Kul-Oba, which 
stood in the cemetery or Panticapaeum, but which undoubtedly 
contained the body of a Crimean prince of Scythian blood, a vassal 
of the great king ; one, who like Skyles of old, the neighbour of Olbia, 
loved to spend nis days in the wealthy and hospitable Greek city. It 
cannot be doubted that this prince was strongly Ilellenized, and that 
he had a regular business connexion with the tyrants of Panticapaeum. 
The tumuli of Karagodeuashkh and of Merdjany, situated on the 
Kuban close to Bosphoran territory, belong to the same category. 
These also were the graves of petty kings, princes of Scythian extrac- 
tion, who, even after the collapse of the great king's ascendancy over 
the region of the Kuban, retained their local authority for some time, 
just like the Scythian dynasty in the Dobrudzha. Finally, there is the 
stately group of tumuli in the districts of Taurida and Ekaterino- 
slav on the lower Dnieper; which are closely akin to the barrow of 
Kul-Oba. I have no doubt that the vast wealth of these tumuli 
belonged to the family of the Scythian great kings, the overlords of 
the petty kings and princes mentioned above. Tnis group, also, lies 
very near the kingdom of the Bosphorus. The royal family seems to 
have maintained a steady and intimate connexion with the Bosphoran 
state. In more distant places, on the middle Dnieper and on the Don, 
Bosphoran influence is much fainter. Local products, of which we 
shall presently speak, prevail. 

The question will be asked, what ts the reason for the powerful 
influence exerted by Bosphoran art and commerce ? Why did the 
Scythian kings not fetch their weapons and their jeweller}' from Olbia ? 
The answer is simple. We have seen that Olbia suffered terribly from 
its exposed position and from the pressure of the Scythians upon their 
vassal city. Some of the Olbian families were still able to carry on a 
flourishing trade and to accumulate great wealth, but the conditions 










were not favourable to the development of local industry and art, 
which demand a calmer atmosphere and greater security and tran- 
quillity, Olbia was content to act as intermediary between Greece 
and Asia Minor on the one hand, Scythia on the other, and perhaps 
to manufacture a few simple, rude objects for export to the Scythian 
provinces on the middle Dnieper. 

It appears then, that the masterpieces which I have described 
above were the work of Bosphoran artists, a Bosphoran school of 
metalwork closely connected with the artistic schools of Asia Minor. 
Compare the Bosphoran productions, especially the two silver vases 
from Solokha (pi. XX, i , 2) and the gold patera from the same place 
(pi. XX, 3), with the Lycian tomb sculptures and the sarcophagus 
of Alexander, and the affinity is immediately apparent. It must 
be remembered that it is the artists of Asia Minor who have trans- 
mitted to us the detailed and authentic studies of Persians on the 
sarcophagus of Alexander, on the great mosaic from Pompeii, and on 
a number of reliefs recently discovered in Asia Minor : moreover, 
that it is Lycian artists who have provided us with scenes from the 
social and religious life of semi-Hellenized Asia Minor, scenes which 
closely resemble, in their artistic character, the contemporary repre- 
sentations of Scythian life produced at Panticapaeum. 

Side by side with the artistic products of Panticapaeum, we find 
hundreds and thousands of others which by their rudeness and 
primitiveness present a strong contrast to the refinement of Panti- 
capaean work. Some of these are rough imitations of Greek jewellery, 
such as a number of necklaces, diadems, bracelets and earrings found 
in the region of the Dnieper and the Don : others are objects decorated 
with local mythological scenes, coarse versions of Panticapaean objects 
of the same type ; such as the earrings from Voronezh, with figures 
of the Great Goddess, and the Merdjany rhyton described above : 
others are objects, mostly of bronze, which served to ornament the 
horses* bridles and the funeral cars. The third class is the most 
interesting. The Scythian animal style, always employed for such 
purposes, shows a rich development. On the one hand, we find the 
specific motives of the style combined in infinite and fantastic variety : 
heads of eagles (fig. 21, e ; compare the pole-top from the Kuban, 
pi. X, a), griffins, lions and other savage beasts grouped with highly 
complicated barbarian refinement : on the other hand, a marked 
Greek influence, attempting to ennoble the style and at the same time 
robbing it of its vigour, by combining it with motives, borrowed from 
Greek vegetable ornament, which are completely alien to the animal 
style. The effect of the combination is not very happy. 


It is very difficult to say where these objects were manufactured. 
Some of them may have been produced by local workmen or by Greek 
immigrants in the native settlements, others by itinerant craftsmen 
wandering with their tools from place to place* working here and there 
to order, and using the raw material provided by their customers. In 
any case, the quantity of objects bears witness to the importance of 
the industry and to the wide circulation of its products* 



THE Sarmatians are first mentioned by Greek writers as a people 
which advanced to the middlg_D on in the second half of t he fourth 
century^ "Since little was known about the new-comers at the 
time, ancTsmce their name closely resembled that of the Sauromatians, 
who had long dwelt on the lower Don and on the shores of the Sea of 
Azov, Greek historians and geographers were misled by the similarity 
of appellation into identifying the two peoples, a confusion which has 
given rise to countless misunderstandings. 

Herodotus and the pseudo -Hippocrates give descriptions of the 
Sauromatians. Of the Sarmatians, the historians of the Roman period, 
who knew them on the banks of the Danube and in the Caucasus, — 
TacituSj^^lemisFIaccus, Ar rian, Pau s anias, Ammian us Marcellinus — 
have left us a picture w'tilchrthough Fragmentary is higOy^Jnrulmed~in~ 
parts. Now the two descriptions are completely different, and precisely 
in the most important and characteristic points. The Sauromatians 
impressed the Greeks by a notable peculiarity of their social system ; 
matriarchy, or rather survivals of it : the participation of women in 
war and in government, the preponderance of woman in the political, 
military and religious life of the community. Among the Sarmatians, 
as far as we know, there was nothing of the kind. They were a warrior 
tribe like the Scythians, nomads with a military organization ; hunters 
and shepherds. They fought many a battle with the Roman legions : 
but it is nowhere said that women appeared in the ranks of their 
army, or that women played any part in their political life. 

We may take it, then, that the Sauromatians had nothing to do 
with the Sarmatians, that the Sauromatians were probably conquered 
by the Sarmatians and then disappeared from history, only surviving 
in historic tradition : writers like Ammian-us Marcellinus attempting 
to combine literary references to the Sauromatians, with later accounts 
of the warlike Sarmatians, formidable opponents of Imperial Rome. 

When first we meet them, the Sarmatians appear as a series of 
separate groups moving westward in uninterruptecf succession. With 
the details of the movement we are but ill acquainted, for the refer- 
ences in the historians of the Roman republic and empire are few and 

2JS3 Q 


sometimes exasperatingly brief : these references enable us, however, 
to reconstruct, in its general outline, the Sarmatian invasion of the 
South Russian steppes. 
•A The Sarmatians, like the Scythians, belonged to the Iranian 

group of Asiatic peoples. They may have been closely akin to the 
Scythians ; may have belonged, like them, to those Iranian peoples 
who were generally called Saeian, to distinguish them from the other 
branch of the Iranians, represented by the Medes and Persians, who 
were bitter enemies of the Sacians, That the Sarmatians were of 
Iranian extraction has been definitely established by the study of the 
Ossetian language : the Ossetians are known to be descended from 
the Alans, the strongest and most numerous, as we shall see, of the 
Sarmatian tribes. Ossetian, although it contains an admixture of 
heterogeneous elements, is unquestionably an Iranian tongue, nearly 
related to Persian. 

We do not know the origin of the general term Sarmatian, applied 
by Greeks and Romans to the succession of tribes which gradually 
dislodged the Scythians from the steppes of South Russia. The 
earliest writer to speak of Sarmatians was the pseudo-Scylax : he, 
and Eudoxos of Cnidos, had heard of Ivppdrai on the Don in the 
fourth century, about 338 B. c. Was this the name of a tribe, 
the first to arrive ? Is it not conceivable, that the resemblance of the 
word Ivpfidrai to the familiar Savpo/xarai, and the amalgamation of 
the new-comers, proved, as we shall find, by archaeological evidence, 
with the Sauromatians long established on the Don, led to the trans- 
formation of the name tvpjxarox into Sap/ufam, and to the perma- 
nent confusion of two distinct peoples in our historical tradition ? 
However that may be, from the time of Pol ybrus^who mentions _t he_ 
Sarmati ans^ in 179 B. c.^ as enemies of thT^ rjmean]^ ythians, th e 
na me of Sarmatian w as m general use among t he Greeks and R omans, 
to designate those Iranian peoples, who, in the third and especially 
in the second century B.C., were advancing from east to west towards 
the Danube and western Europe. The employment of this generic 
designation for all the variously named tribes which supplanted the 
Scythians in the steppes of South Russia, is evidence that these tribes 
were closely interrelated. 

Whence came this Neo-Iranian wave, which re-enacted the story 
of the Cimmerians and the Scythians ? We have little information 
about the history of Central Asia in that tangled and difficult period, 
the Hellenistic. Chinese records speak of an important movement 
during the Ts'in and Han dynasties : Mongolian tribes were pushed 
westward by the vigorous defence of the Chinese frontier, and by the 


construction of the Limes which we know as the Great Wall of China* 
This movement probably displaced a number of Iranian tribes in 
Central Asia and in Turkestan, who turned northward and westward, 
as the Scythians had turned before them, and made for western Siberia 
and the Ural and Volga steppes to the north of the Caspian : the 
southern road being barred by the kingdom of Parthia. I have no 
doubt that the events which took place in Central Asia during the 
third and second centuries were much less elementary and more 
complicated than the Chinese sources make them out ; although the 
Chinese account is by no means so simple as the version given above. 
For further details we must wait until the results of recent exploration 
are better known and better digested : Russian, German, French, 
British and Japanese exploration in Chinese Turkestan, Seistan and 
Baluchistan. The new data, linguistic, archaeological, and his* 
torical, will perhaps afford a clearer view of Central Asiatic history 
in the last centuries before and the earliest after Christ. This much 
we can already affirm, that the flow of Sarmatian tribes towards the 
South Russian steppes was due to the political and economic condition 
of Central Asia between the fourth and the second centuries b. c. : a 
symptom of which was a movement of Mongolian tribes towards the 
west, and a corresponding movement of Iranians. 

The second century B.C. seems to have been the critical period 
of Sarmatian expansion in South Russia, although archaeological 
evidence and a few historical passages indicate that long before this 
period Sarmatian tribes had been slowly moving towards the west. 
But the earliest certain notice of Sarmatians in the South Russian 
steppes dates from the second century B.C. I have already quoted 
the evidence of Polybius, proving the presence of Sarmatians between 
Don and Dnieper in 179. From the part played by the Sarmatian 
king in the political events of this period, it is clear that by 179 Sarma- 
tian power was firmly established between Dnieper and Don, counter- 
balancing the Scythian power, which, as we have seen from the 
archaeological evidence treated in the last chapter, centred in the 
Crimea. To judge from the chronology of Scythian tumuli, it was 
in the second half of the third century that the Sarmatians crossed 
the Don and invaded the steppes between Don and Dnieper. This 
date is confirmed by Strabo. The authority used by Strabo for his 
seventh book, Artemidorus of Ephesus, who wrote at the end of the 
second century, bears witness that about this time the advance guard 
of the Sarmatians, the Iazygians, reached the steppes between 
Dnieper and Danube, while the next in order, the Roxalans or White 
Alans, were between Don and Dnieper and figured on the political 


stage in the war which Mithridates the Great was waging in the 
Crimea. Behind the Roxalans, another of Strabo's informants, the 
authority used for the eleventh book, Theophanes of Mytilene, a 
contemporary of Pompey and his biographer, alludes to Aorsians as 
occupying the left bank of the Don and the shores of the Sea of Azov, 
and to Siracians as holding the valley of the Kuban. Farther east 
we must suppose that the Alans were supreme : it is not long before 
they appear as the dominant tribe in the eastern steppes of South 

The earliest reference to the Alans belongs to the year a. p. 35 * 
Josephus, who mentions them, leads us to suppose that they had 
held the Kuban valley for some time, and were trying to force their 
way, through the passes of the Caucasus, to Iberia and Armenia, with 
the ultimate intention of fighting the Parthians. It seems, however, 
that their attempt was frustrated, that they turned aside and followed 
the other Sarmatian tribes towards the Don and the Dnieper. In 
A. D. 49, during the troubles which arose in the Cimmerian Bosphorus, 
the immediate neighbours of the Bosphoran kingdom were Aorsians 
and Siracians, not Alans. But these tribes seem to have been gradually 
invaded by the Alans and to have combined with them to form a unit 
which was thenceforth known by the name of the dominant tribe, 
the Alans. The continual advance of the Sarmatians soon carried 
them beyond the Dnieper in the direction of the Danube. In a. d, 50, 
we find the Iazygians oetween Theiss and Danube, and the Roxalans 
beyond the Dnieper. 

The Sarmatians now became an imminent danger to Roman 
power, which was threatened from two different quarters. The 
provinces and vassal kingdoms south of the Caucasus daily anticipated 
a flood of conquerors from the steppes beside the Kuban, while the 
Danubian provinces were already feeling the pressure of the Sarma- 
tian vanguard. Little is known about the conditions on the Dnieper 
at this period, and between Dnieper and Danube. The re ^onse ems^ 
to have been the meeting-place of several currentsTa 1 rTfacian 
current of Getians or Dacians, who took Olbia in the middle of the 
first century B. e. ; a Ceh o- Germanic current of Galatians and 
Scirians in the _t bird cent u ry, ano^ jater^of Bastarnians, who appear 
to have n^fMTpipfTatI^^ O~portJon .of ^ the^ mepej^asjn ;_and. lastly, 
the_ferfnatian currenti^^Wtjaia^r^ most to us, is tha t from thi s 
period, the first century b. c, the Iranians maintained~regular and - 
sometimes cordial relations with the Germanic and Thracian tribes, 
aijd that they dwelt side by side with them in the succeeding centuries. 

From the first century B. c, therefore, Rome had to face a new 


enemy on her frontiers : the Sarmatians. Time would fail me, nor 
is this the place, to tell the whole story of the long and sanguinary 
struggle between Roman and Sarmatian which was waged in the 
Danubian provinces and especially in Lower Moesia. A brief sketch 
must suffice. The Sarmatian advance beyond the Danube compelled 
the Romans to take the offensive. In 62-63, Nero's general, Plautius 
Silvanus, dealt a heavy blow at the forces of the Thracian, Germanic 
and Sarmatian tribes, and hurled them back across the Danube. 
The same Plautius Silvanus tried to reinforce the Greek oases in the 
Scythian world by relieving them of the danger which threatened 
them from the Scythians in the Crimea. 

It is generally believed that the Sarmatians destroyed or completely 
absorbed the Scythians. This is one of the many historical figments 
invented by modern historians. The Scythians continued to exist as 
long as the Romans were supreme on the Black Sea : explicit evidence 
is furnished by the Bosphoran inscriptions of Roman imperial date. 
The Scythians only disappear with the arrival of the Goths in the 
third century B.C., or rather with the destruction of the Gothic state 
by Mongolian nomad tribes. It is true that the Scythians were 
conquered by the Sarmatians and had to retire before them. But the 
Sarmatians never managed to dislodge them from their last refuges, 
the Crimea in the east, and the Dobrudzha in the west. We shall see 
in the next chapter that for centuries the Sc ythians ^maint ained a 
strong monarchic al sta t ejn the Cnme ajWith itscentre injthe neigH 1 " 
bourhood of~Simf eropol , and werepowerful enpughjo jpersist in their 
claim to supremacy over Olbia and the Greek towns of the Crimea. 

The expedition of Plautius Silvanus opened the eyes of the Roman 
government to the Sarmatian peril. Hence Nero's project for 
attacking the Alans in the very seat of their pow T er, the steppes of 
Northern Caucasus. It seems to have been Nero's intention, to con- 
centrate his forces in the kingdom of the Bosphorus, which was to be 
made a Roman province for the purpose, and thence to open an 
offensive against the Sarmatian armies ; the Sarmatian empire would 
be cut in two, and the Caucasus and the Danube preserved from 
incessant attacks from north and east, As a subsidiary measure, 
Pontus was to be transformed into a Roman province. Owing to the 
dethronement of Nero, the plan was never carried out. The period 
of civil war which followed the death of Nero laid the D&nubian 
provinces open to Sarmatian assaults. This period over, it cost the 
Romans many efforts and much blood to arrest the triumphal march 
of the Sarmatians and their Thracian and Germanic allies. TJie 
famous wars on the Danube, begun by Vespasian, and continued by 



Domitian, Trajan and Marcus Aurclius, though they led to the 
temporary annexation of Dacia, were primarily defensive wars with 
the object of interposing an effective barrier between the Danubian 
provinces and the combined attacks of Germans and Sarmatians. 

In the Crimea and in the Caucasus, the Romans pursued the same 
defensive policy. We shall _see_that afte r_Nerc ^tjiejringdornof the 
Bosphoruswas re-established as a vassal kingdom, and entrusted with 
the duty of defending the Crimea and Olbia against the Scythians, 
and of keeping watch in the Taman peninsula and on the Don to 
preserve the Greek colonies in that region from complete occupation 
by the Sarmatians. The kingdom of the Bosphorus proving unequal 
to the task, the Roman government, from the time of Hadrian 
onwards, was forced to protect the rear by drawing a tine of fortresses, 

manned by Roman tro ops, ro und the territorToH ghersoncsu s Taurjca ; 

inifact, it riad to resumc~lhat military occupation of part of the 
Crimea, which had been taken in hand by Claudius and by Nero. R oman 
policy in the Caucasus was the same. Thekingdom ol Iberia, whic h 
covered the Caucasian pass es , was guarded, at its m ost vulnerable 
points, '5y~fbrtresses and Roman troops : Armenia also, from the 
second century A. D. The military bases, on which these two groups 
of advanced posts depended, were the province of Lower Moesia for 
the Crimea, and for the Caucasus the province of Cappadocia and the 
legions re-installed there by the Flavian emperors. 

The Alans, by themselves, were never able to cross the barriers 
set up by the Romans. In 73-74, they tried to invade the Parthian 
kingdom from the east : in Hadrian *s time, in 135, they attempted 
to cross the Caucasus and to invade Armenia from the north. Both 
enterprises failed. The invasion of 135 was repulsed by the governor 
of Cappadocia, the historian Arrian, whose treatise on his tactics and 
order of battle against the Alans throws valuable light on Alan military 
organization. The invasion of 73-74 collapsed before the might of 
Parthia. On the Danube also, the Sarmatian advance was arrested, 
once and for all, by the vigorous defensive measures and counter- 
attacks of the second-century emperors. 

In the third century A. D., the situation changed. We have already 
observed, that from their first appearance on the Dnieper, the Alans 
maintained constant relations with the Germanic tribes, and often 
joined hands with Germans and Thracians to fight the Roman legions. 
What shape these relations assumed we do not know : nor what was 
the character of the association, formed in South Russia during the 
third century, between the Alans and the Goths, who were Germanic 
tribes from tie Dnieper. Was it a conquest of Alans by Goths, or 


an alliance, or both ? Again, we know little about the fusion of other 
Germanic tribes, Suevians and Vandals, with the Alans. What is 
certain is that this epoch was one of inestimable importance for the 
history of the whole world. Iranians and Germans combined to 
invade the kingdom of the Bosphorus, the Crimea, and the Greek 
towns in the Tarnan peninsula, destroyed Olbia and Tanais and the 
Roman fortresses in the Crimea, passed to Asia and to Greece, dealt 
formidable blows at the Roman empire on its Danubian frontier, 
and finally succeeded in effecting a temporary conquest of Italy 
herself, of Gaul, of Spain and even of Africa. The Iranian tribes — 
especially the Alans — who had remained in Asia and in the eastern 
portion of the Russian steppes, were drawn once more westward, by 
the Huns : leaving, however, strong, almost independent detachments 
on the Kuban, and, united with the Goths, in the Crimea and in the 
Taman peninsula. I cannot examine this period in detail : it has 
often been treated, and it lies outside the chronological limit which we 
have prescribed. But I must lay stress upon the participation of the 
Alans in the conquest of the Roman empire, and upon the extreme 
importance of the Iranian element in the conquering armies of Goths 
and Huns. The union of Iranians and Germans is mirrored, to take 
a single instance, in the legend about the origin of the Emperor 
Maximin, who was said to have had a Gothic father and an Alan 

Again, it must be borne in mind, that if the Germans exercised a 
powerful influence on the Roman state and the Roman army from the 
fourth century onwards, so did the Sarmatians, whose influence, more- 
over, was much older. From the time of Hadrian, Roman cavalry 
tactics were affected by the distinctive tactics of the Alans ; the 
Sarmatian element played an increasingly important part in the 
Roman army, and we may go so far as to say, that in the third and 
fourth centuries some Roman corps, like that which figures on the 
arch of Galerius at Salonica, were almost entirely Sarmatian both in 
composition and in armament. 

This historical survey, incomplete as it is, shows that from the 
second century B. C. till the third century A. D., th e Sarm atians, and 
particularly tne Alans, were the pred ominant force throughout 
South Russia~and^estern Asia, especially in the central and eastern 
regioris~7~where they were unhampered by their dangerous rivals and 
confederates , the Thracians and the Germans . From the third century 
onwards, they had to share their supremacy with the Goths or even 
yield it to them, but they still formed a very important factor in the 
governing class and in the army of the Gothic tribes. What do 


literary documents and inscriptions teach us about their state, their 
manners and their beliefs ? 

Very little. They were doubtless governed, like the Aorsians and 
the Siracians in 49, by princes or kings. But nothing is known, cither 
about the power of these rulers, or about the social structure of the 
state. To judge from a few words in Arrian, the system was tribal 
and feudal, the component parts of each tribe being governed by 
sceptre-bearers, tnajvrovxot. We would gladly know, if the Alans 
succeeded, as the Scythians succeeded, in creating a united state with 
a hereditary dynasty : but it is doubtful, whether they did or not. 

We learn a little more about their attitude towards the Greek 
towns. Like the Scythians while the Scythians were masters of the 
Russian steppes, they had never any intention of vanquishing or 
annihilating the Greek cities. Even Olbia, which was destroyed by 
the Getians, weak as she was and exposed on every side, was never 
occupied by the Sarmatians. From the first to the third century A, d., 
her enemies were not the Sarmatians, but the Scythians of the Crimea. 
It is true that after the union of the Sarmatians with the Goths, the 
united tribes altered their method and began to conquer and destroy 
the Greek cities, such as Olbia and probably Tanais. But even then 
they preserved Panticapaeum with its social and political structure 
intact. We shall see in the following chapter that they preferred to 
percolate into the populations of the Greek cities and to Sarmatize 
them gradually, adopting, however, the Greek language and some of 
the Greek customs. This must be taken into account in our estimate 
of Sarmatian civilization. 

As to the Greek cities as such, the Sarmatians were content to 
preserve them and to use them as commercial agents. Like the 
Scythians, they had a high opinion of Greek civilization, and of Greek 
goods : wine, oil, jewels, pottery, glass and metal vases. The Greek 
towns on the Black Sea kept their position as centres of production 
and exportation. They continued to work for customers in the South 
Russian steppes. 

The Sarmatians, as described by Greek and Roman authors, did 
not greatly differ from the Scythians. They were Iranians, as we said 
above : perhaps of purer blood than the Scythians, who had probably 
incorporated certain Mongolian tribes into their political and military 

The affinity between Scythians and Sarmatians is demonstrated by 
common features in their clothing, armour, ethnographic type, and 
social and political structure : it is generally accepted, and I shall not 
dwell upon it. More interesting are the differences between the two 








\ * "* ^^1 




!£=r''->- V 




■^CT^Lfi "-»^r • 

^^^^hBll ' S 

J\ ' 


^ J^^^ 

« 4 

3 3 3 


From Prokhorevka, Orenburg. Orenburg Museum 


From the tumulus Buerova Mogila (Tarnan Peninsula). Hermitage, Petrograd 


peoples : which show that t he Sarmatians had had no regular dealings with ; v 
the Scythians; that they had developed, independently of the Scythians, 
somewhere in Central Asia j and that they came as conquerors to 
the steppes of South Russia , bringing with them a body of distinctive 
customs, and a materia! culture peculiar to themselves. Their equip- 
ment and their military tactics were un -Scythian. The Scythians 
were primarily bold archers : their principal weapons were bow and 
arrows. It was only after they had broken the enemy *s resistance by 
a succession of attacks at long range, by a continuous bombardment 
of arrows, sometimes poisoned, that they advanced in wedge forma- 
tion for a 6nal assault, a hand-to-hand struggle in which they used 
their short daggers. 

The tactics of the Sarmatians, especially the Alans, were very 
different. Their principal weapon was a long, heavy lance, such as 
was carried by mediaeval knights. Covered, horse and man, with 
corslets of scale- or ring-armour, or sometimes of cast iron, they 
charged in masses and broke resistance by the weight of this 
heavy cavalry attack : the formation may be compared to a mounted 
phalanx. The lance attack was followed by hand-to-hand fighting in 
which they used long swords with sharp points. The part played by 
bow and arrows was quite secondary. Conical helmets of iron, and 
stirrups, both unknown to the Scythians, completed the Sarmatian 
outfit. There was the same difference between the Parthians, mobile 
archers, and the Sassanid Persians, mounted hoplites. We seem to 
be witnessing the dawn of the Middle Ages, with their ironclad knights. 

Very little is known about Sarmatian religion. From such insuffi- 
cient evidence as wepossess, the Sarmatians would seem to have been 
fire-worshippers* The sacrifice of horses appears to have been 
prominent in their ritual. 

This is virtually all we can gather about the Sarmatians from our 
written sources. But the Sarmatians inhabited the Russian steppes 
for more than five centuries, and the eastern branch of them dwelt 
for ages in the steppes between the Sea of Aral and the Caspian Sea 
and in the adjacent steppes of Siberia. They must have left many 
traces of their sojourn. Nevertheless, the works on the archaeology 
of South Russia provide no clue to the archaeological material illus- 
trating the life and manners of the Sarmatians. Yet such material 
abounds : if it has not been utilized hitherto, the reason is that no one 
has taken the trouble to arrange it systematically in chronological 
order, to date the several finds precisely, and to make a historical 
analysis of the groups. 

In a general work like the present I cannot undertake a task so 
*J53 « 


lengthy and so minute. But I would draw the reader's attention to 
certain phenomena which have never been observed or explained , 
and which are of the highest historical interest. The data are by no 
means complete, nor even very copious : but they form an unbroken 
series which lends itself, in my opinion, to an historical explanation. 
No methodical excavation has ever taken place in the vast steppe- 
land of the Ural valley : in the districts of Ufa and Orenburg, in the 
country of the Ural Cossacks, in the region of Turgai and the district 
of Samara. The area is bounded on the north by tine Ural mountains, 
on the south by the Caspian Sea : eastward and westward it lies open. 
It is traversed by a large river, the Ural, which is navigable and rich in 
fish. Clandestine excavations, verified and sometimes completed by 
competent persons, and investigations by amateurs, have furnished 
a quantity of valuable material, which I have collected and reproduced 
in a special memoir. The graves of * the Orenburg region ', the name 
which I shall give to the whole area, are tumulary like the Scythian. 
Apart from the few prehistoric graves, belonging to the neolithic and 
bronze ages, they date from a period which corresponds to the 
sojourn or the Scythians in South Russia : that is to say, the sixth 
century B. c. and onwards. But in funerary ritual, in sepulchral 
construction, and in tomb furniture, they differ considerably from 
the Scythian graves of the time. I know but one find which bears 
a certain likeness to those from the Scythian tumuli ; it came from 
the village of Pokr6vka near Orenburg, and probably belongs to the 
fifth century B. c. ; it includes a number of triangular arrow-heads, 
some bronze plaques in the animal style from the trappings of a horse, 
and a boar's tooth with a gold mounting like the tooth from the 
Seven Brothers on the Kuban. But first, triangular arrow-heads were 
very common, all over the world, between the sixth and third cen- 
turies B, C. ; secondly, the griffin-head plaques from Pokrovka find 
no convincing analogies in the Scythian tumuli, and there is nothing 
quite like them in the fifth-century tumuli on the Kuban and in the 
Crimea : lastly, the boar's tooth from the Seven Brothers does not 
square with the other finds from the same grave and seems to have 
been imported. On the other hand, there is no difference, either in 
the mode of burial, or in the general aspect of the tomb furniture, 
between the Pokrovka tumuli and the rest of the Orenburg group : we 
notice the same absence of Greek imports, and the same Iranian 
influence : one of the sepulchres yielded a Persian seal, and gold 
plaques, probably imported, in a style which is not far removed from 
the Assyro-Persian. We shall see that these are just the features 
which distinguish the Orenburg group as a whole. 



In characterizing this group I shall take as my principal guide the 
finds recently made in four tumuli near the village of Prokhorovka. 
Although the objects came from clandestine excavations, the reports 
of the excavators seem to be perfectly accurate : they were verified 
on the spot by a competent archaeologist, Rudenko, and the comple- 
mentary excavations which he carried out have given us full parti- 
culars about the funerary ritual and the structure of the tombs. The 
Prokhorovka excavations may therefore rank as scientific, and round 
them we can group others which gave closely similar results. 

The funerary structures in the Orenburg region arc very unpre- 
tentious (fig. 14). A square, oval, or circular trench dug in the soil* 
sometimes with a small pocket in one of the walls. The corpses 
were not put in coffins, but wrapped in mantles of leather or fur, 
occasionally, perhaps, with mats or turf beneath them. 


' N S\* (GWB ]N 

K*W?*4, / 


Fig. 14. 

The funerary ritual is quite different from the Scythian. There 
were no wooden structures, no funeral cars, and no sacrifices of horses 
or human beings. The ritual was no less primitive than the Scythian, 
the dead being provided with everything necessary for the life beyond 
the grave: but it was much simpler. 

The classes of objects buried with the dead are the same as in the 
Scythian graves : arms, sometimes horse- trappings, garments, precious 
/ articles, .pottery. But one characteristic is immediately obvious : the 
[ total absence of Greek imports. No Greek vases, no Greek jewels. 
Imports are not lacking, but they are Oriental, generally Persian : I may 
mention the two silver cups, of Persian work, with Aramaean inscriptions 
fromoneof the Prokhorovka graves (pi. XXIV, 1), and the Persian seal, 
engraved with a figure of a king fighting with a lion, from a grave at 
Pokrovka. The people which established itself in the steppes of Oren- 
burg was not in touch with the Greeks or with the Scythians : but it 
maintained regular relations with the eastern Iranian world, especially 
with the Persian kingdom. The principal weapons are a long heavy 
lance and a long sharp-pointed sword. A heavy corslet of cast iron 


was found in one of the tombs. Like the Scythians, the warriors of 
Orenburg and their wives were fond of gold and silver articles. But 
these articles differ widely from the Scythian* The animal style is rare : 
the geometric style predominates. There is a strong tendency to 
polychromy j rarely observable in the Scythian kurgans. A gold-plated 
dagger-sheath, from a third-century grave at Prokhorovka, is covered 
with floral and geometric ornaments, embellished with enamek in a 
technique which already brings to mind the cloisonne 1 of the so-called 
Gothic period (pi. XXIV, 4). The gold tores from the same find are 
particularly interesting (pi. XXIV, 2, 3). The use of tores for the neck 
is common to several races and peoples, but the shape varies. At 
Orenburg the shape is purely Oriental : a thick wire of solid gold, 
twisted twice or thrice, and ornamented at either end, in Eastern 
fashion, by an animal or an animal's head the well-known dragon 
with the character istic crest, large ears and sharp teeth. We shall 
come across the same type in the South Russian steppes during the 
last centuries before Christ and the first centuries of our era, Scythian 
tores, of which we have many specimens, are almost all Greek work, 
and the shapes are very different. 

The jewels, which are somewhat rare, are clumsy and primitive ; 
the shapes are purely Oriental. The gold garment plaques differ 
greatly from the Scythian forms, and their prototypes must be sought 
in the Assyro-Persian world. 

Speaking generally, the furniture is extremely rude. To a few 
imported articles, we have a great number of local products : iron 
weapons, and objects in bone. Both classes of local products present 
striking analogies with certain objects, of the same shape and purpose, 
found in the Altai Mountains and in eastern Russia, especially on the 
Kama. These belong to the earliest iron age. 

It is impossible to assign an exact date to this group of tombs. As 
far as we can judge from the imports, the oldest tombs belong to the 
sixth, the Pokrovka group to the fifth, and the Prokhorovka to the 
fourth and third centuries b, c. Others are certainly later : some of 
these may be placed in the last centuries before and the earliest after 
Christ. From first to last, and this is important, there are few changes : 
the group is homogeneous and distinctive : the civilization which it 
reflects is a primitive civilization of nomadic warriors, whose only 
relations were with east and north, and who were not in regular 
contact with their neighbours beyond the Volga, 

Of almost the same date as the Orenburg group are the tumulary 
graves which were excavated by Alexander Miller in the vicinity of 
Elizav&ovskaya Stanitsa, a village in the Don delta. The civilization 


which they reveal is a curious one : it differs widely from the Scythian, 
and closely resembles that of the Orenburg region : it lasted on the 
Don for more than three hundred years, from the end of the fourth to 
the first century B. c. The shape of the graves — simple trenches lined 
with reeds — is almost the same as in the Orenburg region, and totally 
different from the Scythian types. The funerary ritual is far simpler 
than the Scythian : the dead man is buried by himself, sometimes 
with his horse or its bridle. The arms of the warriors are not the 
same as in Scythia : just as in the Orenburg group, the principal piece 
is a long heavy lance. But the Don graves differ from the Orenburg 
group in containing a large quantity of Greek objects and a number 
of weapons and other objects of the forms used by the Scythians. 
In a word, a cemetery of half-nomadic warriors, closely akin to the 
Orenburg type, but noticeably modified. 

Much closer to the Orenburg graves are those which have been 
discovered on the Volga, in the neighbourhood of Saratov and of 
Tsaritsyn, and the great find from the valley of the upper Kuban, 
near Stavr6pol, which has recently furnished a whole series of tores 
and bracelets in solid gold, closely resembling those from Orenburg, 
and probably of the same date. 

At the same period, in the third century B.C., we notice a marked 
change in the furniture of the native tombs in the Taman peninsula 
and on the Kuban. The tombs of this time are characterized by a 
taste for polychromy, which is confined to this period and to graves 
with a particular type of furniture. It chiefly shows itself in the gold 
objects interred with the dead, which are set with precious stones and 
many-coloured enamels. For example, the grave at Buerova Mogila 
yielded a gold-plated sword-sheath (pi. XXIV, 5), which in its shape 
and in its geometric, probably polychrome decoration, is remarkably 
like the Orenburg sheath described above. Very characteristic, also, 
the graves in the villages of Kurdzhips and Besleneevskaya. Both are 
dated : the former by engraved gems and by a bronze vase with scenes 
from the myth of Telephos, of the third or second century B. C. : the 
other by engraved gems of the second or first century B.C. Both 
retain some of the traditional features which distinguished the native 
tombs of the Taman peninsula in the preceding period : gold garment 
plaques of circular form ; jewels with delicate, purely classical 
decoration ; and so forth. But at the same time there are novelties, 
unknown in the fourth or third centuries B. c. : gold jewels set with 

firecious stones ; fibulae, especially a round type with a figure of a 
ion, whose body is set with stones, biting his tail ; necklace pendants 
of geometric type ; bronze fibulae, the shapes of which are fore- 



runners of the so-called Gothic fibula. Wherever we turn, we find a 
new world, which brings with it, as it advances, tastes and habits 
unfamiliar to the Greco-Scythian world of South Russia in the fourth 
and third centuries B.C. 

In the first century B.C. and later, we witness the triumph of 
those elements which, in the graves of the transitional period, were 
only beginning to appear. The new civilization, hitherto represented 
by scattered objects, difficult to date, was first revealed and rendered 
intelligible by the explorations of Veselovski in the region of the 

In 1895 Veselovski began to excavate a series of kurgans in the 
Kuban valley. The shape of these kurgans was peculiar : they were 



Fie. 15. 

mostly small, flat tumuli with an oval ground plan, quite unlike the 
Scythian tumuli (fie;. 15). The graves which they contained were 
sometimes very rich and remarkable. Several graves of this type 
were found in barrows which had originally been constructed for 
prehistoric burials with contracted skeletons. 

VesekSvski excavated some dozens of these kurgans, but there are 
hundreds or even thousands in the valley of the Kuban, They are 
all of one type, and the graves which they contain are uniform. The 
funeral structures under the barrows are very simple, and resemble 
those in the Orenburg steppes : they regularly consist of a sepulchral 
trench and a small cave in which the corpse was deposited. The 
funerary ritual recalls the ritual at Orenburg and on the lower Don ; 
the graves are those of warriors and their wives, who were buried 
separately : but there were neither funeral cars, nor sacrifices of horses 
or of human beings. 



No Greek or Roman coins have been found in these graves : but 
they nearly all contain objects exported from Greece, and these enable 
us to date the graves with accuracy. To begin with, the total absence 
of Greek vases with black glaze, and of the various classes of Hellenistic 
pottery, provides a lower chronological limit. But besides this nega- 
tive evidence, we have a good deal of positive, by means of which we 
can arrange the graves in three chronological series. The first is dated 
by its pronounced predilection for glass vases, either cast or hewn out 
of solid blocks of glass (fig. 16, 1— 3). In shape, they reproduce the 
metal vases of the late Hellenistic and early Imperial epoch. It is well 


Fig. 16. 

known that cast- and cut-glass vases preceded blown- glass vases, and 
belong to the first century before and the first century after Christ. 
Such vases have been found in about a dozen tumult, the contents of 
which are uniform : die richest graves were discovered in the kurgans 
of Zuboveki, Akhtanizovka, Vozdvizhenskaya, Yaroslavskaya, Tiflis- 
skaya and Armavir. The jewels which are regularly found in these 
graves are distinctive both in shape and in technique. The artists 
nave a fondness for filigree decoration, the motives being almost 
without exception geometric. But the technique is no longer the true 
granulation of classical times, but an imitation of it, pseudo-filigree, 
which consists in dividing a gold wire into a row of grainlike sections, 
so as to give the impression of a row of separate grains. The artists 


also obtain a rich and varied polychromy by using precious stones and 
pieces of coloured glass (see fig. 1 6, 4 and 5 — the two gold fibulae from 
Zubov's farm, with Alexandrian coloured glass in the centre ; and the 
enamelled earring, which is very popular at Kerch in the later period). 
The first group, then, may be datecf in the first century before and the 
first after Christ. 

The second and largest group can be dated by a series of objects 
which belong to the end of the first and to the second century of our 
era : a profusion of blown-glass vessels, with the typical shapes of 
the period ; engraved gems ; clay vases in the form of animals and 
of human heads ; Roman fibulae ; fragments of terra sigillata ; and the 
like. It is in these Kuban tumuli that the fibula appears for the first 
time in South Russia. Fibulae are rare in the tombs of the first 
period and become common only in the second. Again, in the tombs 
of the first period, nearly all the fibulae belong to one or other of two 
types : one type, usually in gold, is derived from the well-known 
fibula of the La Tene period, and has all the characteristics of the 
tendril fibula, the * fibula with foot turned over * of the Germans, the 
forerunner of the so-called Gothic fibula ; the other is in the form of 
a brooch or of an animal, sometimes a grasshopper ; the material is 
again gold, richly embellished with precious stones. The second 
period offers fibulae of the various types which are current in the 
Roman empire, but also develops the tendril fibula, which comes 
nearer and nearer to the so-called Gothic type. 

The third and last group of graves may be dated in the third and 
fourth centuries A. D. : they present remarkable analogies with the 
Kerch graves of the same period, which we shall describe in the next 

One more observation : in certain tombs which belong to the 
first division of the group, notably in a grave at Zubov*s farm, and in 
another at the village of Ust-Labinskaya, objects were discovered 
which are much earlier than the grave as a whole : a Greek phiale in 
the former grave, with the inscription 'ArroXtawos 'H-y^wWs elpl rfyt <t>a<rt, 
and a bronze candelabrum in the latter, unquestionably belong to the 
sixth century B.C. I have no doubt that the objects were looted, 
in the course of a tribal raid beyond the Caucasus, by the warriors 
who were buried in these graves : the phiale must have been a sacred 
vessel belonging to the temple of Apollo at Phasis. Consequently 
the objects have no bearing on the date of the tombs : but they 
furnish valuable evidence as to the character of the builders. 

Although they extend over a period of more than four centuries, 
the tombs of the Kuban valley form a coherent group. The con- 

P L A T E X X V 

From Maikop. II Cent. b„c(?). Hermitage, Petrograd 

From Western Siberia. I Cent, a, d. Henrnuujc, Petrograd 


struction of the graves, the funerary ritual, and the class of contents, 
are the same throughout. The contents are especially interesting. It 
is true that there are many features in the tomb furniture which recall 
the furniture in Orenburg and at the mouth of the Don, but there are 
others which are quite new and which point to an original and inde- 
pendent civilization. The tomb furniture consists, as I have said, of 
the objects usually found in nomadic graves : arms, horse-trappings, 
remains of clothing, jewels, vessels. Many of these are imports, made 
in Greece or even in Italy. But the general character of the furniture 
is neither Greek nor Italian. It is purely Oriental, and, further, 
widely different from what we observed in Scythian tombs. 

A noteworthy change has taken place in the arms. The Scythian 
sword' — the acinaces with its characteristic sheath and hilt — is nowhere 
found. It has been supplanted by a long sword with a remarkable 
hilt, a type which was also adopted, in the first century, by the citizens 
of Panticapaeum. The wooden hilt is oval in section, and in itself 
extremely simple : but it is regularly topped by a round or square 
knob, of onyx, agate or some other precious stone, or by a wooden 
knob plated with gold and adorned with gems. The guard or the 
upper part of the sheath is often made out of one large piece of semi- 
precious stone. The only parallels, as far as I know, are the swords 
of the second Assyrian empire, the hilts of which are surmounted 
by a knob of bone or bronze, and some Chinese swords of the Han 
period. The Scythian gorytus is also absent : indeed the part played 
by bow and quiver is much less important than in the Scythian graves. 
The lance seems, with the sword, to have been the favourite weapon of 
the warriors buried in the tumuli of the Kuban. The scaled corslet 
was replaced, towards the end of the first century, by the corslet of 
ring-armour ; and a helmet, often conical, is sometimes found in 
such tombs as have not been despoiled. 

The horse-trappings are no longer the same as in the Scythian 
tombs. There are a few specimens of bar-bridles, bridles with 
jjidkut., rods, but the psalia have not the rich and manifold forms of 
the Scythian examples ; they degenerate fast and are gradually 
replaced by simple rings. We do not find the distinctive pieces of 
the Scythian bridle, frontlet, cheek-pieces, ear-guards, nasal, and the 
rest, with their varied forms in the animal style : instead, round 
phalarae, of silver or gold, with embossed ornaments, usually geo- 
metric, sometimes in an animal style, but in an animal style which is 
not the Scythian, and which recalls the corresponding styles of the 
second Assyrian empire and of archaic Ionia. The normal material 
of the horse-trappings is silver : the silver phalarae are often gilt. 

*3S3 s 


Here also we notice a return to Oriental tradition, to the tradition of 
the late Assyrian period, in which the bridles were commonly decorated 
with round phalarae of metal. It is in these tombs that we find the 
first stirrups. 

We do not know much about the costume of the Kuban warriors 
and their wives. But the introduction of the fibula points to a great 
change, and the appearance of the class of fibula derived from the 
La lene type, and of a Celtic fibula of the Augustan period with 
the name of the maker Aucissa, is a proof of regular relations with the 
Celtic, and probably with the Germanic world. 

Still more important is the complete change in the forms of the 
gold ornaments sewn to clothing and shrouds. In the East, at all 
periods, clothes had been ornamented with metal placjues sewn on to 
the material. We have seen that the mode prevailed in South Russia 
in the period of Scythian ascendancy ; in that period, the plaques 
were nearly always round or square : they were fairly large ; they were 
covered with embossed decoration in floral or animal style ; they 
were often imitated from Greek coins, and in the fourth and third 
centuries, religious scenes were sometimes represented. The Kuban 
graves have yielded hundreds of garment plaques, but never of a type 
known from the Scythian tombs : they are now very small and thin, 
and the shapes are geometric, roundels, billets, fleursdelys, crescents, 
voided triangles, rosettes and the like (fig. 17), All these shapes 
belong exclusively to the Oriental repertory : exactly similar plaques 
have been found in Assyria : the same ornaments appear later in 
Sassanian and Arabic art. 

The vessels, numerous in the Kuban graves, are sometimes of 
metal, sometimes of clay. The metal vases, of silver or bronze, are 
almost all importations : the shapes are those current in late Helle- 
nistic and Roman Imperial times. Most of the clay vases are also 
imported : some are local imitations of classical models. But there 
are also native products : the large Asiatic cauldrons of bronze or 
copper, which we found in the Scythian tombs, are very common on 
the Kuban as welL The general form of these cauldrons remains the 
same, but there are alterations of detail which link the Kuban vessels 
with those found in the tombs of the period of migrations. Several 
of the Kuban vessels bear signs which are undoubtedly alphabetical : 
this alphabet, as we shall find, was in use at Panticapaeum in the 
second and third centuries a. d. The same signs occur on certain 
pieces of caparison. 

I would also suggest an Oriental origin for the small round bottles 
of gold — recalling the spherical vases of the Scythian tombs— which 





TuiiskjjM Sumtsa 

Akhtmrjovskaya Stamtsa Jirv'.sislcaiji StanL^a. Vofy&v\$ht7isk3ux Klutajhukawki Aul 


3ufcwslci Khutor ArmavLr 


^wtniVtUatfe Museum Rjhl 
NrKbv EtatennwUv 


jfe J& #» S ^~- 


.i o 

(Jrave d-" the Queen anth tta hfcuk. 


lWT£K$ieBEMBKUNN£N CAustria) 





iJ ® v O A 

C&rthatf? Tliuburb^lajiiJ 

Sarmatian (jarmmt Plaques <£ tjold 

Fig. 17. 




are frequently found in the graves of women. The bottles are always 
studded with gems (fig. 18, i, 2). 

One word more. The tores and mirrors in our tombs are beyond 
doubt local work. Both tores and mirrors were constantly found in 
Scythian tombs : but the forms have now changed. The tores are 
massive and rude, of the type which we noticed at Orenburg and at 
Stavropol. The mirrors are no longer of bronze, like the Scythian 
mirrors, nor have they bronze handles ending in figures of animals : 
they are now made 01 a special alloy, silvery tn colour, are consider- 
ably smaller, and have a wooden handle, or a knob in the centre for 
suspension. Both shape and alloy are purely Asiatic, and are wide* 

Fig. i 8. 

spread in Asia, especially in Central Asia and in China. Speaking of 
the relation between the Kuban tombs and China, I would also 
mention a small amber figure of a lion, found at Armavir in a grave 
of the first century A. D. : it reminds one strangely of the Chinese 
lions familiar from our museums of Chinese art. 

The jewellery and goldsmith's work is particularly characteristic 
in the Kuban tombs of the Roman period : tores t diadems, gold 
plating for weapons and for glass vases, belt clasps, and so forth. 
The most remarkable feature is the complete abandonment of the 
principles of Greek jewellery. What interests the artist is no longer 
delicacy of form, proportions, or artistic modelling, but, above 
all, richness and polychromy in the surface decoration. Historical, 
mythological and religious subjects have been almost entirely sup- 
pressed : geometric and floral motives, and the animal style, hold 



the field. The technical processes employed are embossing, and 
ornamentation by means or gold wires and granulation : as I said 
above, true granulation begins to die out, and is replaced by pseudo- 
granulation, a variant of the gold wire technique. But the decoration 
is entirely subordinated to the colouring. The artist's chief object is 
to vary the coloration by inserting precious stones wherever he can ; 
by filling with stones the spaces which the geometric or floral decora- 
tion leaves free. There was a great demand for vases cut out of 
blocks of solid glass, in imitation of 
stone and metal leases. But the 
elegant shape of the vase did not 
satisfy the inhabitants of the Kuban 
valley in the Roman period : they 
required a casing of gold enriched 
with stones and enamels (fig. r6, 
1,2). The gold diadem or bracelet 
must present a combination of gold 
and of precious stones : a fibula or 
a belt clasp must be gay with inset 
coloured glass and gems (fig, 1 6, 4— 
Alexandrian coloured glass in the 
centre— , and fig. 19, d— transparent 
white glass). I shall speak presently 
of the openwork plaques with 
coloured filling. I would also men- 
tion a vase found in the Caucasus : 
the vase itself is of coloured glass, 
the openwork casing of silver. 

It is interesting to notice the 
revival of the polychrome style, 
rejected by Greels art but popular 
throughout the East. Greet: art 
furnishes no parallels to this rude and vivid polychromy : in the 
East, however, the tradition flourished without interruption. The 
Kuban polychromy is very closely akin to the Persian goldsmith's 
work which is represented by the Oxus treasure in the British Museum 
and by the finds from Susa in the Louvre. The processes, the 
principles, the shapes are the same, but the Kuban work is ruder and 
more primitive. 

The goldsmiths who worked for the Kuban valley revived a form 
of polychrome toreutic which became highly developed in the 
Western Europe of later times : openwork objects, the voids of which 


Fig. 19. 


are filled with coloured substances. They were mentioned above 
when we were studying the sixth- and fifth-century Scythian tombs 
on the Kuban. 1 drew attention to the openwork plaques which 
adorned the horses* bridles, and I pointed to the original models, the 
bronze plaques of Transcaucasia in the earliest Iron Age (fig. 6). It is 
curious to find the same plaques used for belt clasps in the tombs on 
the Kuban. Every one knows that the technique was very popular 
in the metalwork of the Roman Empire, and that it probably exercised 
a strong influence on the cloisonne enamel of the Middle Ages. The 
famous golden vase from Petroasa certainly goes back to these open- 
work polychrome jewels, characteristic specimens of which — earrings 
—are found on the Kuban in the fifth century B.C. and in the Persian 
graves of Susa in the fourth. 

This polychromy profoundly modified the animal style of orna- 
ment, of which the inhabitants of the Kuban valley in the Hellenistic 
period were no less fond than the Scythians. The animal style of 
the graves on the Kuban is doubtless poorer in motives than the 
Scythian, But in certain objects it shows exceptional vigour and charm. 
On a belt clasp of silver gilt, recently discovered at Maikop , and now 
in the Hermitage (pi. XXV, i), the familiar scheme of a beast of prey 
devouring an animal is handled in a most remarkable way. The 
animals are subordinated to their decorative and practical purpose, 
to form a belt clasp, but the powerful feeling expressed in the swoop 
of the griffin, and in the head of the dying horse, contrasts strangely 
with the fantastic position of the griffin's body and with the treatment 
of the horse's hind-quarters, reversed to fill a space which would 
else be vacant. And how rich the colouring is ! The artist has 
studded the animals' bodies with gems and cut garnets, and enclosed 
the whole design in a richly modelled and gaily coloured frame ; 
this frame is the body of the belt itself, formea of rows of wings, the 
compartments of which are filled with enamels. The technique, 
notice, is already that of cloisonne enamel, although the date cannot 
be later than the second or first century B.C. The same combination 
of polychromy and animal style is frequent in the jeweller}' of the 
Sarmatian period : for example, in the belt clasps, already mentioned, 
adorned with figures of lions biting their tails. We shall come 
across the same tendency in the contemporary and kindred jewellery 
of western Siberia, which I shall presently discuss. 

The group of Kuban graves which I have just described is by no 
means isolated. Similar graves occur in most parts of the South 
Russian steppes, and we find a flourishing development of the same 
civilization m western Siberia. The most remarkable parallel to the 


Kuban culture appears in the valley of the Don, I would mention, 
in especial, the celebrated treasure of Novocherkassk, which resembles, 
feature for feature* the furniture of the Kuban tombs ; and the less 
sumptuous find from Golubinskaya Stanitsa. The gold diadem from 
Novocherkassk (pi. XXVI, i) is a characteristic specimen of the strange 
jewellery described above. The shape is Greek ; Greek the cameo 
which adorns the front of the diadem ; and the pendants attached to 
the lower part of the diadem are imitations of the pendants which 
are common in Greek jewellery and widespread in South Russia 
during the fourth and third centuries B.C. But the upper part of the 
diadem is in a pure animal style, and reminds one of motives which 
we shall find in Siberian jewellery. Lastly, the polychromy of the 
diadem as a whole, the pearls, the amethysts and garnets, large and 
small, with which the entire surface is studded, takes us back to the 
valley of the Kuban. It is there also that we find perfect parallels for 
the gold perfume vase (pi. XXVI, 3), decorated in the animal style 
and set with stones ; for its lid, which recalls, with extraordinary 
vividness, the belt clasps from the tombs on the Kuban ; for the 
golden vase covered with figures of animals and set with stones 
(pi. XXVI, 4) ; and above all, for the hundreds of little gold garment 
plaques, some of them encrusted with tiny pieces of blue or pink 
enamel, pink coral, or turquoise (fig. 17). The same spirit prevails in 
the curious perfume-tube, in the form of a Hon whose body is replaced 
by an onyx tube (pi. XXVI, 2). I cannot speak of all the objects 
which make up this splendid treasure 1 but I must insist on their 
close resemblance to the finds from the tombs on the Kuban. The 
Novocherkassk find forms a kind of bridge between the Kuban and 
Siberia. The date has been hotly disputed : but if we consider 
that the cameo set in the diadem is probably a late Hellenistic work, 
that pendants like those of the diadem never appear in the jewellery 
of the Roman period, that the small gold statuette of Eros (pi. XXVI, 
5) is late Hellenistic, that the Kuban analogies point to the period 
of the first group of tombs ; we must date the treasure in the first 
century B.C., or at latest the first a. d. A little later is. the gold 
vase found at Migulinskaya Stanitsa, which bears the names of the 
owner, E^/favoja"*, and of the artist, TopouXas eirofct, with an indication 
of die weight, k(irpas) xp(vctov) MH (forty-eight ounces): a closely 
similar vase, uninscribed, forms part or the treasure of Novocherkassk. 
The inscription is valuable, for it shows us where the vase was made : 
I have pointed out, in a special article, that both names are Thracian, 
common at Tanais and even at Panticapaeum in the Roman period. 
Let us bear this important fact in mind. 


From the same region of the Don and the Donets comes a peculiar 
group of silver gilt plaques, mostly from horse-trappings, whicn belong 
to the earlier part of the same period (pi. XXVII, 4). The decoration 
of these phalarae, which have recently been published by Spitsyn, is 
sometimes identical with that of similar plaques from trie region of 
the Kuban. The most interesting of those found on the Kuban is the 
bronze phalara, excavated at Vozdvizhenskaya Stanitsa in 1899, 
representing a goat devoured by a hydra with six heads, all eared 
and nearly square. Large finds of plaques have been made at Sfver- 
skaya Stanitsa in the Taman peninsula, at Taganrog, Fedulovo and 
Starobelsk in the region of the Don and the Donets, at Yanchekrak 
in the district of Taurida : that is, between the Caucasus and the 
steppes of the Dnieper. The style of the plaques from Akhtanizovka 
is different, and appears to be purely Greek : the Akhtanizovka 
phalarae were probably either imported, or made by Greek artists in 
South Russia. The SiVerskaya rind dates from the second or first 
century B. c. : the others from about the same period. Some of the 
plaques are decorated with patterns only, and in these the orna- 
mentation is purely Iranian ; just as in a plaque found in 1901 at 
Tiflisskaya Stanitsa on the Kuban. Others, at Starobelsk for instance, 
bear figures of animals (fig. 20) or mythological scenes. The animals 
have nothing in common with the animals of Roman provincial art : 
a similar style prevails in the painted tomb discovered by Stasov at 
Kerch and presently to be described : a pure Iranian style ; derived, 
as I have proved in my work on decorative painting, from the art of 
which one branch is Parthian art ; and perhaps presenting a certain 
analogy with the earliest stage of the Ionian animal style, which was 
borrowed from the East. Two gilded silver plaques in the Cabinet des 
Medailles at Paris (pi. XXVII, 1,2), which are said to have come from 
Pontus, although the provenience is not certain, show a style and 
a technique which are almost identical with those of the plaques 
from South Russia. The Oriental style of the Paris plaques was 
recognized, and their date established, by Drexel and by Reinach, 
but neither scholar noticed the numerous and convincing analogies 
from South Russia, It is well known that in their artistic develop- 
ment Pontus and South Russia were always closely associated. But 
it may be that the Paris plaques reached Constantinople, where they 
were purchased, from South Russia. The engraved inscription, in 
spite of Drcxcl*s arguments, I believe to be false : it looks as if it had 
been made in Russia, where Mithridates is even more popular among 
forgers than Saitapharnes : the Pontic provenience would be subse- 
quent, and occasioned by the inscription. 






¥#"•._.. _ _ 



I should like to draw special attention to the second, fragmentary 
plaque, which is published here for the first time, by kind permission 
of Mr. Ernest Babelon, director of the Cabinet des Me'dailles, and 
from a photograph supplied by him (pi. XXVII, 2). The Indian 
elephants head in the centre, and the three stags, show all the 
peculiarities of later Iranian style. It is worth noticing that the scales 
which cover the body of the central animal in the first plaque are 
very similar to the scales of the archaic lion on the plaque from the 
Golden Tumulus near Simferopol (see p. 52). 

Still more interesting are the plaques with mythological subjects. 
On the Sfverskaya plaque (pi. XXVII, 4) there are two scenes, on the 


left the triumph of Dionysos, on the right Athena mastering a giant. 
Both scenes, however, have undergone a quaint transformation which 
recalls some of the Greco-Indian monuments from Gandhara. For 
instance, the costumes are purely Oriental, and the panther on which 
Dionysos is seated has an almost human head. The curious technique 
of the plaque, especially the strewing of the ground with incised dots, 
is constant in the monuments of our scries. The plaque from Yan- 
chekrak has a half-length, frontal figure of a sun god, with wings of 
the recurving Oriental type, holding a solar disk, a plate or patera with 
an eight-petalled rosette, in his right hand. These mythological 
plaques remind one strangely of a number of monuments which 
exhibit the same technique and the same treatment of mythological 
figures. Some groups of them have been found in Bulgaria. The 
earliest group, that of Panagiirishte, which belongs to the third 


century b. C, consists of a horse's frontlet in silver and four circular 
phalarae of the same metal. The frontlet has the regular form of 
the third century frontlets from South Russia, for instance, the 
frontlet from the Tsymbalka tumulus : the phalarae remind one of 
the phalarae from Alexandropol, which show strong affinities with the 
whole jrroup of phalarae which we are discussing. But the style 
of the figures — Herakles mastering a boar, a siren with a lyre and two 
griffins — which represent, under borrowed forms, deities of the 
local pantheon, has the same characteristics as the above-mentioned 
plaques from South Russia, those of the second and first centuries b. c. 
The same may be said of the animals and the floral motives in the 
circular phalarae from Panagiirishte. The best parallels are provided, 
on the one hand by the phalarae found at Alexandropol, and on the 
other by the phalara from Starobelsk (fig. zo). Still closer is the 
analogy between the South Russian phalarae of the Sarmatian 
period and the recent find of silver-gilt phalarae at Galiche in the 
district of Orekhovo on the Danube, which I shall describe and analyse 
in the Memoirs of the Bulgarian Archaeological Society. The 
phalarae are all circular, and the forms correspond closely to those 
of the phalarae from South Russia mentioned above. The technique 
is the same in both groups : I would instance the habit of covering 
the whole ground w r ith incised dots. The floral ornaments are 
oriental, as in South Russia, and have nothing to do with classical 
floral patterns. Here also we find mythological figures which recall 
the most popular figures in the Greco- Iranian pantheon of South 
Russia : the bust of the Great Goddess flanked by birds (compare 
pi. XXIII, 5), and a corresponding figure of a native prince on 
horseback (pi. XXIII, z\ Even the great tores which cover the 
necks of both figures find a parallel in the numerous tores of 
the same type found at Anapa, Stavropol, Akhtanizovka, and on the 
Kuban, which belong to the third or second century B. c. Another 
good parallel to the Bulgarian mythological phalarae is presented by 
many of the objects which compose the rich find of Petroasa in 
Rumania, to be dealt with in my eighth chapter : for example, the 
tores, and above all the large gold patera mentioned in the preceding 
chapter. Here again we have a local pantheon in classical disguise. 

Finally, the same style and the same main Ideas appear in certain 
finds from Germanic lands. I am thinking of the phalarae from 
Raermond in Holland (pi. XXVII, 3), with a frieze of animals and 
a figure of Hercules strangling a lion which presents the same peculi- 
arities — beardlessness, local costume — as the Hercules of Panagiirishte: 
and of the famous cauldron from Gundestrup. I agree with Salomon 



3 4 


BLACK SEA. Cabinet des Medailles, Paris 



STANITSA, TAMAN PENINSULA. Historical Museum, Moscow. II Gent. b. c. 



Reinach and Drexel m attributing these monuments to a peculiar 
branch of art which they call Irano-Celtic : but I am convinced that 
this art grew up, not in Pontus or Cappadocia, but in South Russia ; 
that it began to develop as early as the final period of Scythian domina- 
tion, the third century B. c. ; and that it was brought to completion 
by the Sarmatians in the second and first centuries B.C. It was 
indebted to the Sarmatians for the strong Iranian tone both in the 
representation of human beings and animals and in the Iranian floral 
motives ; Greco-Scythian art contributed the semi-Greek travesties 
of Iranian gods ; the Celts certain technical peculiarities and in the 
treatment of human and animal figures a peculiar touch borrowed 
from archaic Ionian art at the time when their own art was just 
beginning. A few special traits may have been added by the native 
Thracian population. There is nothing astonishing in the mixture ; 
nor in the wide diffusion of the style, wbich even reached Germany. 
I would remind the reader of what I said about the advance of the 
Celts in South Russia in the third century B.C., where they encoun- 
tered first the Scythians — Posidonius, in Strabo, knew of Celto- 
Scythians on the Black Sea — and afterwards the Sarmatians, who were 
evidently familiar to the Gaulish tribes, especially to the Scordiscans 
who infested the Balkan peninsula in the second and first centuries 
B.C. Through the Bastarnians, the phalara and the cauldron of 

IGundestrup may very well have passed from hand to hand until they 
reached Germany. I would invite the reader to compare the Gunde- 
strup serpents with those on the plaque from Vozdvizhenskaya Stanitsa, 
and the gods with those on the Siverskaya and Yanchckrak plaques. 

These products of the Irano-Celtic art of the last centuries before 
Christ probably represent the achievement of those groups of Sarma- 
tian tribes which first came into contact with the western peoples. 
It is noticeable that they consist almost exclusively of horse-trappings, 
the bearers of them being conquering horsemen whose lives and 
successes depended upon the speed and training of their horses. 
Iliey show close kinship, of course, with the objects from the Kuban, 
from the Don and from Siberia, especially with those of the earlier 
period, the third and second centuries B.C. : but in general they are 
characteristic of the western, earlier group alone. The specifically 
Sarmatian products are the objects, described above, from the 
Kuban, from the Don, and from Siberia : these belong to the last 
century B. c. and the first a. d. and probably represent the special 
culture of the strongest and latest of the Sarmatian tribes— the 
Alans. But the ethnographical problem will be discussed later. Let 
us now proceed to the analysis of the archaeological evidence. 


Finds like those of the Kuban are not lacking farther west- Gold 
plaques in geometric shapes have been discovered in the barrows of 
the Kharkov district. A characteristic find, with small gold plaques 
shaped like the Kuban plaques, came to light at Tsvetna in the 
district of Kiev : and another near Odessa. From Olbia come two 
little gold perfume bottles, exactly similar to the bottles from Ust- 
Labinskaya Stanitsa on the Kuban and in the treasure of Novo- 
cherkassk ; one of these Olbian bottles presents a striking resemblance 
to the gold vases from Novocherkassk and from Migulinskaya Stanitsa, 
by reason of its animal-shaped handles and the lion on the ltd : like 
the cauldrons from the Kuban, it bears an alphabetical sign. 

We now come to the gold objects brought from western Siberia 
to the Hermitage in the eighteenth century. I have no space to discuss 
them at length. That they came from Siberia cannot be doubted : 
yet at first sight one is almost tempted to follow Vesel6vski in assigning 
them, one and all, to the region of the Kuban. Compare the Maikop 
belt-clasp, described above, with the gold plaque in the Hermitage 
(pL XXV, 2) : they agree in the composition, in the attitude of the 
norse, and in the expression of the dying animal : one would be 
inclined to attribute the two plaques to a single artist, were it not for 
a marked difference of execution. The plaque from the Kuban is full 
of life, the Siberian probably reproduces an oft-repeated motive and 
consequently lacks the pathos of the plaque from the Kuban. Other 
Siberian plaques are coarser and clumsier. But some of them are 
real masterpieces, vying with the finest pieces in the Oxus treasure 
and in the Persian tomb at Susa. Take the eagle attacking a goat, or 
the statuette of an eagle grasping a swan . In composition, the Siberian 
eagle is a worthy rival of the celebrated plaque from the barrow of the 
Seven Brothers, and in polychromy it is unequalled . Take the Siberian 
tore lately published by Pridik. The griffin is the familiar Persian and 
Pan ticapaean animal . But the living force of head and body , the leonine 
leap, the rich and cunning polychromy, make it far superior to the 
grimns of the Oxus treasure. There is a marked contrast between 
these masterpieces and the rude figures of fantastic animals peaceably 
devouring victims no less fantastic and no less peaceable. It is as if 
we had originals from a master's hand and travesties by barbarian 
imitators. But there can be no doubt about the origin of the Siberian 
objects and of the motives w T hich they exhibit : they came from the 
Iranian world, eithef directly or through South Russia. There remains 
the question of date. It is natural to suppose, that most of the objects 
in the Hermitage, together with those which w r ere brought to Holland 
by Witsen and which have completely disappeared, came from a 



single great find or from a few contemporary tombs in a single ceme- 
tery* If this is so, great importance must be attached to the Roman 
coins of Galba and Nero published by Witsen and probably discovered 
along with the objects which he carried off. There is no reason to 
suspect WitseiTs good faith : and where could Roman coins have 
been found in Siberia, except in such tombs ? These considerations, 
and the contemporaneousness of the Siberian finds with the finds from 
the Kuban and from Novocherkassk, lead me to believe that the 
greater portion of the Siberian objects are to be assigned to the first 
century A.D.; some, perhaps, being earlier than this date; others, it 
may be, later. 

This civilization then was widespread. I shall show in the next 
chapter that it profoundly influenced the Panticapaean civilization of 
the second and third centuries a. d., and we shall see that it left 
strong traces all over Europe, in Austria, in Italy, in France, tn Spain, 
and in Africa. 

It will possibly be asked, whether we are justified in speaking of 
a civilization, whether the predilection for polychromy may not be 
explained by influence from the Roman empire, where the polychrome 
style took root, in more than one province, about the second century 
a. d. I do not deny an influence from without, nor the presence, 
among the Kuban finds, of objects imported from Asia Minor and 
from Syria, where the same tendency to polychromy produced 
articles which took the fancy of the Sarmatian customer. But I think 
that after the preceding demonstration, no one will dispute the 
existence of a very distinctive Sarmatian civilization. We see before 
us the development of a purely Oriental civilization by a nomadic 
people, which brought the germs of this civilization with it and 
developed them locally, while in uninterrupted contact with the Greek 
colonies of South Russia. The polychrome style ts only one of the 
characteristics of this civilization : but its appearance is easily intelli- 
gible. The whole civilization was Iranian ; in part, it was directly 
based on the productions which marked the last period of cultural 
development in Babylonia and Assyria. We have little information 
about the story of Iranian art outside of Persia, We have seen that it 
influenced the earliest Scythian art. We now see that its development 
did not cease in the succeeding centuries, and that it invaded the 
Russian steppes, for the second time, in the Hellenistic age. More- 
over, this Iranian art of Central Asia did not remain stationary during 
that obscure period ; it made progress, keeping, however, to the same 
lines as in the seventh and sixth centuries, when the Scythians first 
introduced it into South Russia. Just as before, it has a decided 


taste for polychromy, chiefly known to us from its jewellery, for 
few save metal objects have survived to our time, but doubtless 
manifested in other arts as well. The jewels from Kelermes, with 
their amber and enamel inlay, exhibit the same tendency as the jewels 
from the barrows on the Kuban, on the Don, and in Siberia. Another 
feature of this Iranian style is its fondness for the animal style. In 
essentials, this animal style, as we have already noticed, is the 
same in the first centuries before and after Christ, as it was in the 
sixth century B.C.: a propensity to pure ornament still shows itself, 
in the arbitrary disposal of animal bodies, in associations, sometimes 
fantastic, of several animals, in the formation of extremities as animal 
heads, in the love of fabulous creatures, especially griffins. But 
between the Scythian animal style and that of our finds there are great 
differences. The chief reason is that our style is more closely connected 
with the Assyro-Persian animal style, and apparently less influenced 
by northern elements, although these do appear in the monuments 
from Siberia and from the region of the Don. The style of our finds 
seems to have been almost unaffected by the Scythian animal style 
as the Scythians had developed it, mainly under Greek influence, in 
South Russia. 

Where were the objects made, which are found in the tombs of 
the Kuban, of the South Russian steppes, and of western Siberia ? 
I think we may say that, just as in the Scythian period, some of the 
objects are imports from the East, some imports from Greek colonies, 
and some neither the one nor the other* Among our finds there are 
several pieces of goldsmith's and jewellers work which offer a curious 
mixture of Greek and Oriental motives and technique. Take the 
diadem from Novocherkassk, the bracelets and the round fibulae from 
the Kuban, the glass vases encased with gold and precious stones, 
the silver openwork vase, with hunting scenes, from the Caucasus, 
the gold perfume-bottles, and other articles. Here there is such a 
mixture of elements that the objects cannot be defined except as 
Greco-Oriental. The Maikop belt, the griffin tores, the eagle and 
a number of gold statuettes from Siberia, are surely Oriental importa- 
tions. But the hand of a Greek artist is traceable in the diadem of 
Novocherkassk and the other works mentioned above. The answer 
to our question is given by the gold vase from Migulinskaya Stanitsa, 
and by parallels, found in Panticapaean tombs of the first to the third 
centuries b,c, to the objects from the tumuli on the Kuban. It was 
a native artist of Tanais who made the Migulinskaya vase, and Panti- 
capaean artists who furnished the warriors of the Kuban region with 
most of their gold and silver articles. The gold bottles from Olbia 


appear to be the work of an Olbian. Now as before, the Greek 
artists or Hellenized natives who lived in the Black Sea cities 
worked for the neighbouring peoples and adapted themselves to their 
tastes and requirements. Was it such artists who made the barbaric 
objects from Siberia ? I do not know. There may have been a local 
industry which imitated the articles imported from the East and from 
the Greek cities on the Black Sea. 

If we proceed to ask ourselves, now that we have described and 
analysed this civilization, whether it can be associated with a particular 
people, the answer appears to be easy. It is a purely Oriental civili- 
zation, which is closely connected with the Iranian; which slowly 
advanced from Central Asia and gradually invaded the steppes of 
South Russia and Siberia in the first and second centuries a. d, ; 
which exerted a profound influence, as we shall show in our seventh 
chapter, on the Greek colonies of the Black Sea. The furniture 
of the tombs which we have examined shows that the warriors buried 
there were nomads, mounted hoplites, whose principal weapons 
were lance, sword and dagger, whose defensive armour consisted 
of a helmet and a corslet of scales or rings, and who were already 
acquainted with spurs. 

All these data correspond to what we know of the Sarmatians, 
who occupied part of the Russian steppes about the end of the fourth 
century, who advanced slowly westwards and settled down for a long 
while in the basin of the Kuban, I do not hesitate then to identify 
the bearers of this civilization with the Sarmatians, especially the 
Alans, Iranian tribes who were at the height of their political develop- 
ment in the first and second centuries a»d., precisely the time at 
which this civilization flourished. We can now complete, with the 
help of archaeological evidence, the historical picture which we 
outlined at the beginning of the chapter. 

Setting out from Central Asia, the Sarmatians moved both west- 
ward, occupying the steppes in the Ural region ; and northward, to 
the Siberian steppes. At the end of the fourth century B.C., they 
appeared, as we Know from the pseudo-Scylax, on the Don. At this 
period, we found near Tanais a civilization mixed in character but 
certainly belonging to nomadic warriors and very different from the 
Scythian. Some have supposed, that the cemetery of Elizavetovskaya, 
excavated by A. Miller, belonged to the pre-Roman city of Tanais. 
I cannot subscribe to this theory. The city of Tanais was founded 
by Greek colonists from Panticapaeum. Its cemetery, in consequence, 
in the fourth and third centuries, must have been like that of Panti- 
capaeum : it must have been a Greek cemetery. Now the cemetery 


of Elizavetovskaya, in all its features, is the cemetery of a population 
which was originally nomadic, a population of mounted warriors , 
which settled near the mouth of the Don so as to watch the Greek city 
of Tanais and to collect tribute from it. 

From numerous inscriptions, all of the Roman period, discovered 
on the site of Tanais, we know that the city then presented a semi- 
Iranian aspect. The names of the citizens, who belonged to the 
aristocracy of Tanais, are partly Iranian and partly Thracian, The 
population, therefore, was a mixed population of Hellenized Iranians 
ana Thracians, which gradually supplanted the original Greek inhabi- 
tants. The process of supersession, the result of which we see in the 
second century A.D., the time to which most of the inscriptions belong, 
was necessarily a protracted one : the native infiltration into a hetero- 
geneous society, and the complete Hellenization of the native elements, 
can only have been accomplished in the course of long years of peaceful 
cohabitation. The Iranian names , studied by V . Miller, of the second - 
century Tanaites, and the type of the Tanaites as we gather it from 
funerary statues and votive reliefs of the period, approximate to the 
names and type which we know to be Sarmatian. It is among the 
Ossetes that we find most of the analogies with those Tanaite names 
which have been recognized as Iranian : the armour of the Tanaite 
horsemen on the funerary reliefs and statues corresponds exactly with 
the Sarmatian, as described by Tacitus and portrayed in Roman reliefs. 
All this leads me to believe, that as early as the fourth century an 
advanced tribe of Sarmatians came and settled on the banks of the Don. 
It drove the Scythians across the river and opened relations with the 
kingdom of the Bosphorus and the colony of Tanais. The Sarmatians 
kept an eye on the colony, and it paid them a regular tribute. They 
also absorbed the native population of the country, the Sauromatians, 
and part of the former masters of the Don steppes, the conquering 
Scythians of old. In this way a mixed population grew up at the 
mouth of the Don ; it gradually became Hellenized, and supplanted 
the old Greek population of the city. Established on the river and 
constantly reinforced from the Ural and Volga steppes, the Sarma- 
tians, held in check by the Scythians at the barrier of the Don, 
naturally spread southward, towards the valley of the Kuban and the 
mountains of Caucasus, in the fourth or third centuries B.C. and later. 
I observed in the third chapter that after the end of the fourth century 
there are hardly any Scythian graves in the valley of the Kuban. 
The Scythians were probably obliged to leave the Kuban valley when 
they decided to resist the advance of the Sarmatians at the barrier of 
the Don. The Kuban valley was gradually occupied by the Sarma- 


tians. The Siracians were probably the first tribe to arrive, and it 
was probably they who expelled the Scythians. If the name of the 
Siracians is correctly restored in a corrupt passage of Diodorus, they 
took an important part in the struggle of two pretenders, Eumelos and 
Satyros, for the tyranny of the Bosphorus, in the year 300, The 
advance of the Sarmatians from east to west was comparatively slow ; 
towards the second century B.C., they occupied the whole valley of the 
Kuban, with the exception of the delta, that is, the Taman peninsula ; 
and even penetrated into the peninsula in the first century. They 
thus became immediate neighbours of the Bosphoran kingdom, with 
which they entered into relations. Thence they moved still farther 
west, and subdued the w r hole of South Russia, We have seen that 
the valley of the Don preserves numerous archaeological traces of their 
prolonged sojourn on the Don and between Don and Dnieper in the 
second and first centuries B.C. 

On their arrival in the valley of the Dnieper and the Bug, the 
Sarmatians were faced by a much more complicated situation. In 
the second century b. c, when the first Sarmatian tribes appeared, 
the ethnological and political aspect of the region between Dnieper 
and Danube was extremely varted and complex. As early as the 
third century B.C., Celtic tribes possessed themselves of a number of 
districts in South Russia, and advanced as far as the Black Sea. 
German tribes followed at their heels. Moreover, the revival of a 
Thracian state, that of the Dacians, in the first century B. c. and the 
first a.d,, led to constant invasions of South Russia by Thracians. 
One of these brought about the capture and sack of Olbia. The 
Sarmatians also settled in the same localities. The varied ethno- 
graphical character of the steppes between Dnieper and Danube is 
reflected by the archaeological finds. The period in which Scythian 
influence predominates, the fourth and third centuries B. c., with its 
sumptuous tombs of Scythian chieftains, is succeeded, in the steppes 
of the Dnieper region and in the wooded country northward, by a 
period in which the graves gradually lose their Scythian stamp, and 
in which a number of new strains are observable, very different from 
the Scythian. A great number of objects have recently been discovered 
in the basin of the Dnieper, which certainly belong to the civilization 
of La Tene : bronze and clay vases, and weapons. I have already 
referred to the appearance of the fibula of the latest La Tene period. 
These are the remains of the Galatians, a portion of whom, the Celto- 
Scythians of Posidonius, settled on the shores of the Black Sea. There 
is also a series of graves which closely resemble the Orenburg graves 
and which probably date from the third century B.C.: these are 

*35J u 


perhaps to be assigned to the first Sarmatian arrivals, the Iazygians 
and the Roxalans, the bearers of the silver phalarae described above. 
Other finds are exactly analogous to the Kuban finds of the first 
century a.d, : including, for example, the characteristic gold plaques. 
We may assign them to the Alans. At the same time, a new 
civilization is asserting itself on the middle Dnieper. It is marked 
by a new mode of burial : the tumuli disappear, and their place 
is taken by vast crematory cemeteries, the urn fields, which date 
from the first and second centuries A. D. Many writers have pointed 
out the resemblances between these urn fields and contemporaneous 
phenomena in Germany, especially South Germany. Ante may be 
right in supposing an advance of Germanic tribes, carrying with 
them, as they advanced, a number of Slavs. 

In a word, the archaeological evidence as to the region between 
Don and Dnieper does not conflict with the historical. A closer study 
of the archaeological data than has hitherto been attempted will give 
us clearer insight into the difficult questions which are raised by the 
early stage of the period of migrations. The details of the subject 
cannot be discussed in a book about Iranians and Greeks. 

It thus appears that such knowledge of the Sarmatians as we 
derive from ancient writers, is completed and amplified by archaeo- 
logical evidence. Far from being destructive barbarians, the Sarma- 
tians were a fresh wave of Iranian conquerors, who brought to Europe 
the new achievements of Iranian culture in the home of the Iranian 
people. Like their predecessors, the Scythians, the Sarmatians did 
not aim at abolishing the centres of Greek civilization. They fought 
with the Greeks, but never because they were bent on destroying or 
subduing the Greek cities. Even remote Tanais, and unprotected 
Olbia, continued to exist, commercial intermediaries to the Sarma- 
tians, as they had been to the Scythians. But unlike the Scythians 
the Sarmatians showed great power of penetration. They contrived 
to make their way into the Greek cities and to Iranize them almost 

This process will form the subject of the next chapter. 




THE political life of the Greek cities on the Black Sea was 
profoundly affected by the appearance of the Sarmatians in the 
South Russian steppes. 
As long as the Scythian kingdom held the Sarmatians in check on 
the banks of the Don, the political and economic situation of the 
Bosphoran kingdom suffered little change. The hard times began, 
both for the Scythians and for the kingdom of the Bosphorus, in the 
third or second century b. c, when the Sarmatians crossed the Don, 
penetrated far into the region of the Kuban, and invaded the Tarnan 
peninsula. The Scythians were forced to seek shelter in the Crimean 
steppes, and consequently began to exert stronger and stronger 
pressure on the Greek cities of the Crimea. Chersonesus and the 
Bosphorus were compelled to fight the Scythians for their indepen- 
dence, and at the same time the Greeks of the Bosphorus had to 
defend the Greek cities of the Tarnan peninsula against the advancing 
Sarmatians, Life in the Greek cities became more and more pre- 
carious and uncertain. The Greeks tried to resist, they paid heavy 
ransom to the Scythian and Sarmatian armies, they mobilized their 
citizens and fortified their towns, but the hostile pressure increased, 
and the resources accumulated during centuries of prosperity 
rapidly diminished. They still exported corn, leather, fish and slaves, 
but, while the land routes became more and more unreliable^ the 
sea routes became quite insecure. Piracy prevailed as at the dawn of 
Greek civilization. Athens, enfeebled as she was, and * allied ' with the 
Romans, could offer no remedy. Rhodes, who had policed the seas 
in the third and second century B.C., lost her importance at the end 
of the second century, and Rome, the new mistress of the world, 
engaged in internal struggles of increasing ferocity, had neither time 
nor leisure to provide for the security of the Aegean and the Black Sea, 
and took not the least interest in the affairs of the Pontic Greeks. 
Trie position became critical at the end of the third century B. c. f 
when a strong Scythian state was formed in the Crimea under the 


sceptre of King Skiluros, In order not to succumb to the Scythians, 
the Greek cities of the Crimea, Chersonesus foremost, had no choice 
but to look for a powerful protector who would turn his attention to 
the northern shore of the Black Sea. 

Pontus and the Crimea had been closely connected from the 
earliest times. In both regions, there was a strongly Iranized native 
population, and in both, Greek cities which made their living by 
exploiting native vassals or bondmen. It will be remembered that 
Pontic Heracleia recolonized Chersonesus ; the relations between the 
two cities never ceased. As long as the Bosphorus, with the help of 
Athens and of its own abundant resources, was able to maintain an 
army and a navy strong enough to defend the whole Crimea, Cherso- 
nesus availed itself of the services of its neighbour and ally. But 
when this protection failed, and the Bosphorans themselves were 
groaning under hostile pressure, the Chersonesans turned once more 
to their ancient allies, the Greek cities of Pontus. The precarious 
position of Chersonesus, as early as the third century, is illustrated 
by the decree in honour of Synseos, a young scholar who belonged 
to one of the good Greek families in the city. He had recounted, in 
an historical treatise, the miraculous appearances of the Parthenos, 
the patron goddess of Chersonesus, and also more prosaic matters, 
the diplomatic intercourse of Chersonesus with the Bosphoran kings, 
which had assured it military protection. The combined assistance 
of the miracles and the Bosphoran armies was rarely adequate to 
defend the city from the growing fierceness of the Scythian onslaughts. 
We can well understand, that in this difficult plight the Chersonesans 
sought allies wherever they could hope to find them. 

But the Pontic cities, the natural allies of Chersonesus, were no 
longer free. A monarchical state had formed itself in Pontus during 
the third century, and the Pontic kings, who were only slightly 
Hellenized, had contrived to subjugate the Greek cities. It was to 
these kings, therefore, that the Chersonesans addressed themselves 
when they were at the end of their resources. By the second century 
b. c, their prayers became more instant, as we know from an inscrip- 
tion, recently discovered, which testifies to a military treaty between 
Pharnaces I of Pontus and the city of Chersonesus. But even the 
kingdom of Pontus was only a Hellenistic monarchy of the second 
class, entirely dependent on the Roman Empire ; so that its inter- 
vention did not greatly alter the position in the Crimea. 

This position changed with the accession of Mithridates, sur- 
named the Great. Every one knows of his conflict with Rome, and 
that in his campaigns against the Romans, he found a safe base on 


the northern coast of the Black Sea, But it is not sufficiently recog- 
nized, that it was only against their will, and of bitter necessity, that 
the Crimean Greeks summoned Mithridates to their aid. Their 
fortunes had sunk so low, that they must either become the subjects 
of the Scythians, or accept the assistance of the Pontic king. It was 
certainly not from any liking that they approached him. The generals 
of Mithridates conquered the Scythians in three campaigns, took 
possession of the Bosphoran kingdom, and established Pontic garrisons 
in all the cities on the northern snore of the Black Sea, including Olbia. 
For the Greeks, accustomed to freedom, especially the Chersonesans 
and the Olbians, the domination of Mithridates was a heavy burden. 
It became intolerable, when they realized that the philhellenism of 
Mithridates was merely superficial, and that his true purpose was to 
unite the native populations, especially the Iranian tnbes, under his 
banner, and to lead them to the conquest of the Roman Empire : the 
Greeks being useful only as a source of revenue. The Scythians, 
indeed, were vanquished by Mithridates, and the Crimea was nomi- 
nally embodied in the Pontic kingdom, but it nevertheless remained 
independent and powerful, and Mithridates hastened to enter into 
amicable relations with the Scythians : it is well known that he 
made himself popular by marrying his sons and daughters to Scythian 
princesses and princes. He also adopted a friendly policy towards 
the Maeotian, Sarmatian and Thracian tribes. He thus succeeded 
in arousing a strong feeling of sympathy in these warlike races, who 
looked upon Mithridates as a descendant of the Achaemenids and 
the founder of a new and great Iranian power. We pointed out, in 
preceding chapters, that neither the Scythians nor the Sarmatians 
were in any wise barbarous peoples. If large numbers of Greek 
objects found their way into their fortified camps, if they valued 
Greek representations of native myths and of native military and 
religious life, they must certainly have learned from the Greeks the 
history of the Iranian world and of the universal empire of Persia. 

It is not surprising, therefore, that the tribes of South Russia 
lent their aid to Mithridates. When he found a last refuge in Panti- 
capaeum, after his defeat by Lucullus and Pompey in Asia Minor, 
and tried to organize a new army to march against Rome, it was not 
the Iranian and Thracian tribes who betrayed him, but the Greeks, 
first at Phanagoria and then at Panticapaeum. He perished in a rising 
of his Greek subjects, who were apprehensive of his alliance with their 
secular enemies and preferred the lordship of Rome to that of an 
Iranian king. The same story as in Asia Minor. 

It must also be remembered, that Mithridates brought into the 


Greek towns of the Bosphorus, besides his garrisons, a great many 
colonists from Paphlagonia, Pontus, and Cappadocia, especially after 
he had been driven out of those regions by the Romans. We may 
conjecture that the first Jewish colonists of Panticapaeum were 
introduced by-JVlithrj^alcs : so mah^rnoTc competitors lor the Greek 
population of the kingdom. 

It was the war with Mithridates which opened the eyes of Rome 
to the political and economic significance of South Russia. As early 
as the second century B.C., the Romans had occasionally interested 
themselves in the affairs of the Greek colonies on the northern shore 
of the Black Sea, since the Crimea was connected with Pontus f and 
the Romans had to dictate their wishes to that Hellenistic monarchy. 
But it was only after the Mithridatic war, in which the Romans had 
to face almost the entire forces of Iranian expansion, that they realized 
the enormous importance of South Russia, which was still one of the 
principal producing centres, and which at any moment might become 
a rallying point for the Iranian tribes, the most dangerous enemies of 
the young Roman Empire. It is for this reason that from the second 
half of the first century, South Russia always played a very considerable 
part in the foreign policy of the Roman Empire. It was some time 
before the Romans formed a definite policy for dealing with the Greek 
colonies and the Iranian tribes in South Russia. In the middle of the 
first century B.C. Rome herself was in a critical situation. Civil war 
was raging in Italy and in the eastern and western provinces. The 
Romans were too busy to think of such distant countries. Pompey, 
bestowing freedom with one hand on the Greek cities of South Russia, 
confirmed with the other the authority of Mithridates* villainous son, 
Pharnaces. Pharnaces, we have reason to believe, was only another 
Mithridates : his ambition was to conquer Asia first, and then Rome. 
But he lacked both the genius and the resources of his father, and he 
miscalculated the opportunity presented by the Roman civil war. 
He attempted to reconquer Pontus, but was bloodily defeated by 
Caesar at Zela. He tried to shelter himself in Panticapaeum and to 
reconstruct his forces. But the governor whom he left in the Crimea, 
Asandros, refused to recognize him, and Pharnaces fell in a hopeless 

We do not know who Asandros was, or what title he had to the 
Bosphoran crown. His Greek name tells us nothing. But we may 
suppose that he was a citizen of Panticapaeum, half Greek like most 
of the citizens of the Greek cities in Pontus at the time. His haste to 
marry a daughter of Pharnaces, Princess Dynamis, suggests that this 
marriage was probably the sole legitimate title with which he could 


confront Mithridates of Pergamon, a Pergamene Greek who called 
himself a bastard son of Mithridates the Great and who was one of 
Caesar's favourites, Caesar owed it partly to the younger Mithridates, 
that he was not assassinated at Alexandria : he assigned him the 
kingdom of Pharnaces as a reward. Asandros would not submit to 
this decision. With the help of his subjects he defeated Mithridates, 
who perished in the conflict. 

It is curious that after this stroke, Caesar, who never forgot a 
friend, did not think of expelling Asandros and punishing him for his 
treason. But Caesar had hardly time. On his return to Rome after 
the final defeat of his opponents in Spain, he was not able to carry 
out his plan for an eastern expedition to destroy the Thracian empire 
of Boerebista and to prepare nis decisive blow at Iranian power in the 
east. That he concentrated his army at Apollonia, and that he 
intended to begin his Parthian campaign, like Alexander the Great, 
by a war on the Danube, proves that he would have settled the affairs 
of the Bosphorus before opening the great struggle with the Iranian 
forces. An inscription from Chersonesus, discovered recently and 
studied by myself in special articles, shows that he was deeply 
interested in trie fortunes of that colony, that he had friends there, 
and that he pursued a definite policy in South Russia. But Caesar 
was assassinated at Rome on the eve of his departure for the east, 
and Asandros contrived, 110 doubt by paying money, to obtain recogni- 
tion from Antony as archon and later as king of the Bosphorus. 

As ruler of the Bosphorus, Asandros governed the enfeebled 
kingdom with a strong and resolute hand. He managed to re-establish 
order, to defeat the pirates, and to secure his frontiers against Scythian 
and Sarmatian invasions. He was sixty years old when he ascended 
the throne, and he remained king to an advanced age. The end of 
his reign was troubled. A usurper, one Scribonius, who claimed to 
be descended from Mithridates, and who probably belonged, like 
Mithridates of Pergamon, to the Greco- Oriental aristocracy of Asia 
Minor, enlisted Asandros* subjects against him, wedded Queen 
Dynamis, and ejected the aged king. It is not impossible that 
Dynamis, daughter of Pharnaces and wife of Asandros, took part in 
the rising. She certainly profited by it, for in 17 B.C. she was the 
recognized ruler of the Bosphorus, and she struck coins with her own 
efngy and the insignia of Mithridates. Scribonius w r as probably only 
her tool, to be discarded at the first opportunity. 

Henceforth the dominant figure in Bosphoran history is the 
energetic and unscrupulous Queen Dynamis. Augustus, and his 
counsellor for eastern affairs, Agrippa, had to reckon with her. 


They could not allow her to remain sole governor of the Bosphoran 
kingdom. The risk was too great, that the story of Mithridates 
would be re-enacted. But they did not venture simply to expel her : 
she seems to have had considerable support from the subject popula- 
tion. Accordingly they tried a compromise. They compelled 
Dynamis to marry Polemon, a Greek of Asia Minor, in whose hands 
the kingdoms of Pontus and of the Bosphorus were to be united. 
Polemon was a forcible man who was not prepared to play Scribonius : 
he quarrelled with Dynamis and married Pythodoris, daughter of 
Pythodoros of Tralles. This marriage has been supposed to show that 
Dynamis had died. I think not. Numismaticaf and epigraphical 
evidence, which I have studied in a special memoir, proves that 
Dynamis not only survived Polemon 'a marriage, but deprived him 
oi his kingdom. It seems most likely that when the marriage took 
place, she fled to the steppes of the Kuban ; found support among the 
Sarmatian and Maeotian tribes, who were probably kinsfolk of her 
mother ; wedded a Sarmatian or Maeotian, Aspurgos, son of a native 
prince, Asandrochos ; and possessed herself of a number of fortified 

C laces in the Bosphoran kingdom. Polemon offered stout resistance, 
ut he was enticed into a trap and slain, by a tribe, probably Sarma- 
tian, which bore the significant name of Aspurgians and was probably 
the tribe of Dynamis and of Aspurgos. 

The disappearance of Polemon opens a new era in the history of 
the Bosphorus. Dynamis had conquered, but she could not reign 
without recognition from the Roman Government. Now Augustus, 
in 0—8 B. C, was neither able to intervene with an armed force, nor 
inclined to countenance a power which was not controlled by himself 
and his agents. On the other hand, Dynamis could not make her 
throne secure without Roman support : the principal resources of 
the Bosphoran kingdom were the revenues from traffic with the 
Aegean, and that traffic was impossible without the permission of 
Rome. A compromise was effected, Dynamis was recognized, but 
as a vassal queen, who must acknowledge the supremacy of Rome and 
the independence of the Greek cities. This was the opening of a 
period, in which the kingdom of the Bosphorus was virtually incor- 
porated in the Roman Empire, although it preserved its dynasty and 
a nominal independence. 

I have dwelt at some length upon the beginnings of Bosphoran 
vassalage, first because the period has usually been misinterpreted by 
our historians of the ancient world, and secondly, because unless wc 
understand it, we cannot understand the political and social life of 
the Bosphoran kingdom in Roman times. I shall add a word or two 


about the political vicissitudes of the Bosphoran kingdom down to 
the third century A. D. On the death of Dynamis, Aspurgos succeeded 
to the throne and reigned peacefully till his decease. His second wife 
was a princess with the Thracian name of Gepaepyris, who bore him 
a son Cotys. His son by Dynamis was Mithndates. After the death 
of Aspurgos, the two sons naturally quarrelled. The elder, Mithri- 
dates, occupied the throne as co-regent with his stepmother and his 
younger brother. He conceived a high ambition : he wished to 
reconstitute the kingdom of Mithridates the Great, Betrayed by his 
brother, and probably betraying his mother, he fell in a desperate 
struggle, in which he was assisted by Sarmatian tribes against a 
Roman army sent to attack him. 

After his death, the dynasty of Cotys established itself, and ruled 
the Bosphorus right down to the arrival of the Goths : the loyal 
servant of the Roman Empire, It is not this Thraco-Iranian dynasty 
that interests us, but the views and designs of the Roman Empire : 
without the Roman Empire the Bosphoran kingdom could not have 
endured. The main lines of Roman policy towards the kingdom of 
the Bosphorus were fixed, once and for all, by Augustus and Agrippa. 
They were both well aware,that it was impossible to enlarge the Roman 
Empire beyond the Danube and to take in the whole of the Pontic 
coastland. Nero was the only Roman emperor who seriously con- 
templated such expansion and prepared an expedition for the purpose. 
More sensible emperors saw that the Roman forces were not sufficient 
to conquer the Iranian portion of the world. The Sarmatians and 
the Parthians remained dangerous enemies, to be averted, if possible, 
from the Roman frontiers, and to be closely watched. The same 
policy was adopted towards the Germans after the defeat of Varus. 
To weaken and to watch, these were the two objects of Roman policy 
towards the Iranians. But how ? 

The safest way was to strengthen the non- Iranian elements on the 
Black Sea, to keep alive the fires of Greek civilization which still 
smouldered in the ancient Greek colonies. There were economic as well 
as political reasons : the Greeks of the Aegean, as well as the Greeks 
on the southern shore of the Black Sea, could not exist without the 
produce of South Russia. Now the most powerful organization on 
the Black Sea was the kingdom of the Bosphorus. That kingdom 
must at all costs be preserved. Otherwise it would be impossible to 
keep close watch over the movements of the Sarmatian tribes, and 
to bring up the necessary forces, when the Sarmatians threatened to 
swallow up the Greek settlements on the Black Sea. Moreover, the 
kingdom of the Bosphorus was still a great centre of supply, not only 

»JS3 1 


for famished Greece, but, still more important, for the Roman armies 
stationed in Pontus, Cappadocia, and Armenia to prevent a Parthian 
advance. The kingdom of the Bosphorus must therefore be assisted 
and upheld, especially in its perpetual conflict with the Scythians of 
the Crimea, who were still dangerous opponents. The Black Sea 
trade routes must also be kept clear, so that the merchant fleets could 
sail from the Cimmerian to the Thracian Bosphorus and to the 
southern shore of the Black Sea. These objects the Romans attained 
by various devices. The first was an annual subvention to the kings 
of the Bosphorus for the maintenance of an army and a fleet, which 
were supervised, as we know from Trajan *s correspondence with Pliny, 
by the vigilant eye of the Governor of Pontus. The subvention was 
probably made on the understanding that the kingdom should 
provision the troops and cities of the Pontic provinces. Another 
device consisted of military measures. The principal object of the 
Roman administration was the preservation of peace on the seas. 
Now the fleet which maintained tnis peace needed a secure and ample 
harbour. Chersonesus was the only harbour safe enough and well 
enough situated to become the centre of a naval police force. Accord- 
ingly, when the emperors saw that the Bosphorus could not defend 
the whole Crimea unaided, and at the same time keep guard on the 
sea, or rather, when they understood that the assignment of such a 
mission to the Bosphoran kingdom would make it over-strong and 
perhaps imperil Roman prestige, they sent a Roman squadron to 
Chersonesus and garrisoned the city with troops from their armies on 
the Danube. The fort of Chersonesus once occupied, the Romans 
were obliged to defend the city and its territory, and to patrol the 
coast between Chersonesus and Panticapaeum. The defence of the 
city meant the fortification of the passes leading from the region 
occupied by the Scythians to the territory of Chersonesus : the 
patrolling of the coast involved the erection of forts and naval stations 
at prominent points. Chersonesus seems to have been first occupied 
in the time of Claudius and Nero, when the formation of a new 
province, Scythia Taurica, was being seriously considered. But this 
occupation did not last long. Domitian and Trajan, preferred to 
reinforce the kingdom of the Bosphorus, and to entrust it with the 
entire defence of the Greek colonies, including Olbia, which soon 
recovered after its destruction by the Getians, and Tanais, which 
had been almost annihilated during the war between Polemon and 
Dynamis. But this policy was not successful. Hadrian, and after him 
Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius, Commodus, and Severus, saw that it 
was impossible for the Greek cities of the Black Sea to hold out 


without Roman troops. The pressure of the Scythians and the 
Sarmatians was too heavy ; the frontier was too long for the Bosphoran 
army to defend. Accordingly Hadrian and his successors reoccupied 
the Chersonesan part of the Crimea, and garrisoned Olbia and probably 
Tyras as well. At the same time they gave these cities their Freedom, 
in other words they relieved them of the Bosphoran protectorate and 
conceded them the status of Roman provincial cities. The Roman 
fortress , recently excavated on the promontory of Ai-Todor, was one of 
the points of concentration for Roman troops from the army of Moesia. 

This state of things lasted for nearly two centuries, and the 
kingdom of Bosphorus throve. The change came in the third century 
a. d. The dynasty of the Severi was the last which was able to 
preserve order on the northern shore of the Black Sea. The revolu- 
tions which succeeded one another at Rome in the middle of the 
third century, the internal policy of violence and extortion gradually 
adopted by the emperors, rendered the Roman Empire incapable of 
maintaining its frontiers and compelled the government to abandon 
the outposts of empire to their fate. It was from this cause alone, that 
the Bosphorus had to capitulate to the combined forces of Sarmatians 
and Goths, and lost, almost completely, its rank as an outpost of 
Greek civilization and of Roman policy. The lot of the other colonies 
was worse still. Olbia became a small and struggling fishing village : 
©o did the other cities on the coast. Chersonesus alone was defended 
by the Romans, and preserved its Greek culture to the end of the 
Byzantine period, Panticapaeum did not disappear : it continued to 
exist for centuries, down to our own time if you like, but it was no 
longer a real Greek city. Hellenism in Panticapaeum was perishing 

Here we may stop : but let us not forget, that the seeds of civilized 
life were never entirely destroyed in the Greek cities on the Black Sea. 
If Panticapaeum was no longer a Greek city, it remained a very 
important centre of culture, and it was one of the homes of the 
Christian religion. Its civilization was not Greek, but the life which 
its inhabitants led was a civilized one, and its neo- Iranian culture 
radiated over an enormous area. The Byzantine Empire did its best 
to gather up the threads of Roman policy, and to preserve a breath of 
cultivated life in the ancient Greek centres ; not only Chersonesus, 
but at times Panticapaeum, and certain new settlements in the Crimea, 
served as starting-points for the civilizing mission of Byzantium in 
the Russian East. 

We said above, that the two centuries of the Roman Empire were 
a most prosperous period in the kingdom of the Bosphorus. But it 


was no longer the old kingdom. Its life had greatly altered. We have 
already noticed, that the Bosphoran state was a mixed state from the 
very outset : but we also observed, that in the cities the Greeks 
succeeded in retaining their nationality and their civilization : it 
was only the aristocracy and the rural population that showed a strong 
native admixture. In the Roman period, the Iranization spreads to the 
townsfolk, and the Greek element receives a strong native infusion. 

This can be seen at every turn. Let us look first at the political 

The ruling family had not a drop of Greek blood in its veins. 
What its origin was we have seen. A Sarmato-Pontic or Maeoto- 
Pontic woman, Dynamis, married a prince whom we have every 
reason to suppose a Sarmatian or a Maeotian, that is, an Iranian or 
a semi-Thracian : Aspurgos, Aspurgos, in his turn, married a 
Thracian princess. These persons were the ancestors of the Bosphoran 
rulers, whose names are mainly Thracian, Cotys, Rhescuporis, 
Rhoernetalces, or else recall their Maeotian or perhaps Sarmatian 
affinity, such as Sauromates : we know that historical tradition tended 
to identify Sauromatians and Sarmatians. The preponderance of 
Thracian names may be thought curious, seeing that the kings were 
Thracian only through Gepaepyris the second wile of Aspurgos, But it 
must be remembered that there had always been a strong Thracian 
strain in the population of the Bosphorus, and that the Thracian royal 
names in the Roman period were but a revival of a very ancient 
historic tradition, the tradition of the Spartocids. The name of 
Sauromates, highly popular in the Bosphorus from the first to the 
third century a, d., did not necessarily recall the Sarmatian origin 
of the dynasty ; it may equally well be referred to the Sauromatians, 
the Maeotian tribe of which we have frequently spoken. Dynamis, 
the warrior queen, reminds us of the Maeotian and Sauromatian 
queens, Tirgatao and Amage. Pontic reminiscences, on the other 
hand, are rare : one of the kings, and only one, was called Eupator; 
it is doubtful whether after Mtthridates Eupator or not. The vassals 
of Rome may well have been chary of commemorating the great 
enemy of the Roman Empire. 

The same mixture is observable in the religious traditions of the 
Bosphoran monarchy. On their coins and in their inscriptions, the 
Bosphoran monarchs liked to evoke the memory of Herakles ; he, and 
through Eumolpos, Poseidon, were considered to be the ancestors of 
the royal house (see, for example, the coin pi. XXX, 3, second 
row, ng. 2). The tradition is clearly the same as the legend 
(invented by the Athenians to glorify their allies) which attributed an 



Athenian origin to the Odrysian kings. But Herakles plays a great 
part in the coinage of Mithridates VII, the son of Dynamis, who was 
in no way related to the Thracian dynasty; Mithridates seems to 
have been thinking of the Maeotian legend mentioned in a previous 
chapter ; the Hefienized Maeotian aristocracy, to judge from the 
legend, believed itself to be descended from the god Herakles and 
the Great Goddess of the natives. On the other hand, Herakles was 
extremely popular with the Roman emperors of the second century 
owing to the Cynic and Stoic theory of imperial power : Commodus, 
it will be remembered, believed himself to be Hercules inrf **"}$* 
This fashion no doubt influenced the kings of the Bosphorus, who 
like Herakles had to combat malefic forces, the Scythians and the 
Sarmatians. We can also understand the combination of Herakles 
and Poseidon which was introduced by Mithridates VII. We have 
seen that Poseidon figured in Herodotus* list of deities venerated by 
the Scythians. Asandros invoked this god, Poseidon X^o-freto*, 
together with Aphrodite Newark, to celebrate a naval victory, 
probably over the pirates of the Black Sea ; the pair seems to have 
been worshipped by the natives at Gorgippia from the earliest times. 
Further, it was natural that these monarchs should venerate the 
sea-god and wish to identify themselves with him : they were warriors 
and traders, whose prosperity depended on their command of the sea. 
An odd mixture uf religious ideas derived from divers sources. 

We have already noticed that, even under the last Spartocids, the 
power of the Bosphoran rulers was no longer a compound of a Greek 
magistracy' and a native kingship. It gradually took the form of a 
Hellenistic monarchy. In the time of Asandros, an attempt was made 
to revive the old dualism : which would suggest that at the outset he 
was supported by the Greek population of the Bosphorus, anxious to 
resuscitate the Spartocid tradition. But Asandros hastened to assume 
the more convenient and more brilliant title of king. Henceforward 
the Spartocid dualism was dead, and the rulers of the Bosphorus 
adopted, once and for all, the title of king, in its Irano-Hellenistic form 
King of Kings, a style which was no doubt inherited from Mithridates 
the Great, and which was tolerated by the Romans, in view of its popu- 
larity with the natives, who constituted an important part of thekingdom. 
This would lead us to suppose, that the Greek cities in the Bosphoran 
kingdom did not long retain the autonomy which Pompey had granted 
them, and which Augustus had confirmed. The last autonomous 
coins issued by the cities of the Bosphoran kingdom are the bronze 
coins of Agrippea and Caesarea, the new names imposed by Augustus, 
as Oreshmkov has seen, on the two capitals of Queen Dynamis* 


kingdom, Phanagoria and Panticapaeum. And I feel convinced, that 
the goddess, whose head is represented on these coins, is no other 
than Queen Dynamis herself. It is possible that even at a later period 
the city of Phanagoria preserved some vestiges of this fictitious and 
titular autonomy. The fact is, that under Roman domination the 
Bosphoran kingship was a Hellenized Oriental autocracy, like the 
kingships of Commagene or of Armenia. But in the course of its 
three centuries of Roman protectorate, it underwent gradual but 
significant alterations. We can follow the changes by studying the 
inscribed stones and the types and legends or the royal coinage. 
During the first and second centuries, both in their inscriptions and on 
their coins, the kings emphasize their vassalage, their dependence 
upon Rome and the Emperor. On the stones, they regularly style 
themselves <J>tAo/>w/.uuo? and 4>iAoic«u<rap, according to the custom of 
Roman vassal kings ; they assume the prenomen and gentile name 
of the Caesars — Tiberius Julius— and the priesthood of the imperial 
cult. Under Eupator, a Capitol was even constructed at Panti- 
capaeum, as if the city had become a Roman colony. From the 
period of Augustus to that of the Flavians, with a few brief intervals, 
the gold coins of the Bosphorus show heads of the emperor and of a 
member of the imperial house ; from the time of Domitian onwards, 
the emperor's head on one side and the king's on the other ; again a 
sign or vassalage. Lastly, in their bronze coinage (pi. XXX, 3), the 
Bosphoran kings make a special parade of their vassalage and of their 
loyalty, as well as of the military services rendered to the empire and 
to their subjects. On the bronze coins, as on the coins of other vassal 
kings, the ting is represented sitting on the curule chair, with the 
image of the emperor on his crown, and the emperor's head on his 
sceptre : or else in the garb of a Roman general, ridingto attack the 
enemy, a type which recalls the contemporary coinage of Thrace. The 
reverses commonly figure the complimentary gifts of the Roman 
emperors : the selection of gifts is traditional, but it well expresses 
the dominant ideas of the Roman Empire in its dealings with Oriental 
vassals. The Bosphoran kings received the curule chair ; the royal 
crown, probably embellished with the image of the emperor ; the 
sceptre surmounted by the imperial bust ; and the complete armour 
of a Roman knight, helmet, spear, round shield, sword, and sometimes 
battle-axe. The intention was always the same everywhere r the king 
was to be a loyal vassal, and a good soldier. The triumphal types 
which are used by certain kings are imitated from the corresponding 
imperial coins, and give expression to the military character of the 
Bosphoran kingship. 


In the course of the second century, however, the enthusiasm for 
vassalage dies down, and the types of the Bosphoran bronze sensibly 
alter. Henceforth religious types predominate. At the end of the 
second century the image of the Great Goddess reappears (pi, XXX, 
3, second row, fig, 3) : it had already played a considerable part in 
the coinage of Dynamis and her heirs and successors. The goddess 
is figured in her Hellenized form, in the guise of Aphrodite. Further, 
the martial representation of the king charging the enemy is gradually 
replaced by another type, influenced by the statues of Roman 
emperors from Marcus Aurelius onwards (pL XXX, 3, first row, 
fig, 4). The king, who is bearded, sits on a heavy charger, wearing 
a corslet of scale armour, a flying cloak, trousers, and soft leather shoes: 
a diadem encircles his head ; in his left hand he holds a long sceptre, 
without the image of the emperor ; his right hand makes the gesture 
of adoration, either to the supreme God, whose bust sometimes 
appears, as a subsidiary type, on the same side of the coin ; or to the 
Great Goddess, who is regularly represented on the reverse. A totally 
new type, then, which bears witness to the thorough Iranization of 
the dynasty, and to its increasing religiosity. The type recurs, at the 
end of the second and the beginning of the third century, on gold 
funerary crowns. The religious and political character of these 
representations is even more strongly marked than on the coins, I 
have republished these crowns, with a commentary, in a special 
treatise : we shall return to them. 

We have every reason to suppose that the power of the king was 
absolute. There is no evidence that the Greek citizens of the kingdom 
had any share in the government. The administration, also, is purely 
monarchical. The king was surrounded by a court, the members of 
which bore pompous, Oriental titles. It was the courtiers who filled 
the public posts, who acted as military governors in the provinces, as 
financial officers, and the like. The system t)f administration was 
probably modelled on those of the Iranian kingdoms, the Parthian, the 
Armenian and the rest. It was very likely inherited from Mithridates 
the Great. Roman influence can occasionally be traced : for instance 
in the creation, during the Trajanic period, of a kind of praetorian 
prefect or, let us say, grand vizier. 

The social and economic system had not greatly altered since the 
later Spartocid period. Two classes are to be distinguished. On the 
one hand, the governing class, the citizen aristocracy, which served 
at court and in the army, and which provided the lung with agents 
and officials 1 landed proprietors, merchants, owners of industrial 
establishments. On the other, the governed, the serfs and slaves. 


The sole owners of cultivated land appear to have been the king, 
the city aristocracy, and the temples, I can hardly believe that a 
peasant-farmer class, of the Greek type, existed or could exist in the 
Bosphoran kingdom. Agricultural conditions did not lend themselves 
to a system of small proprietors. The territory of the kingdom, 
theoretically vast, since it covered the whole of the Crimea and the 
Taman peninsula, was actually very modest. The Crimean plains 
were in the hands of the Scythians, the mountains were inhabited by 
the Taurians. The cultivable and cultivated portion of the Taman 
peninsula was still smaller, for to judge from what we know of the 
Aspurgians, the Sarmatians had seized the greater part of the country. 
The precariousness of agriculture in the Bosphoran territory is illus- 
trable by archaeological evidence. Both from ruins, and from repre- 
sentations of fortified cities on coins (pi. XXX, 3, second row, fig, 4), 
we learn that in the Roman period the cities of the Bosphorus, large 
and small, were transformed into so many fortresses. A group 
of small strongholds, belonging to the Roman period, has been 
discovered in the Taman peninsula : these must have been fortified 
refuges for the agricultural population. Moreover, the Bosphoran 
kings, like the Chinese emperors, had to erect lines of forts, to 
protect the cultivable land in the peninsulas of Kerch and of Taman, 
Strabo mentions a wall constructed by Asandros : whether it is one 
of those that still remain we cannot tell. It may be that this system 
of defences dates from the change in Scythian policy towards the 
Greek cities : but this is doubtful. In any case the three parallel 
lines in the peninsula of Kerch, and a similar line in the Taman 
peninsula, as far as they have been studied, seem to date from the 
Roman period. Lastly, certain pictures in Panticapaean tombs of 
the first or second century give us a good idea of agricultural life 
at the time. The dead are frequently represented as heroized beings, 
in the usual Greek schemes, the funeral repast, and the combat. 
The Panticapaean artists, who painted the scenes on the walls of the 
tombs, were not content merely to reproduce the old types : they 
transformed them into scenes from the social life of the deceased. In 
one of these tombs, which belongs to the first century a.d., the scene 
is an idyllic one (ph XXVIII, 1). The dead man, armed, and followed 
by a retainer, is riding towards his family residence, a tent of true 
nomadic type. His household, wife, children, and servants, are 
assembled in the tent and beside it, under the shade of a single tree ; 
beside the tree is his long spear, and his quiver hangs from a branch. 
The interpretation is easy ; the gentleman is a landed proprietor, who 
spends most of his time in town : in summer, during the harvest 


The first now destroyed. I -II Cent. a. d. 


season, he goes out to the steppes, armed, and accompanied by armed 
servants ; taking his family with him. He supervises the work in the 
fields, and defends his labourers and harvesters from the attacks of 
neighbours who live beyond the fortified lines : Taurians from the 
mountains, ferocious foot-soldiers ; Scythians from the plains, horse- 
men and landowners. Who knows ? perhaps he raids a little himself. 
Fights between neighbours are often represented in Panticapaean 
tomb-paintings of the first or second century B. c. We see the Panti- 
capaean chief, followed by his little army, battling with a black- 
bearded Taurian or with shag-haired Scythians, the same bold archers 
and horsemen whom we knew in the sixth, and down to the third 
century B.C. (pi. XXIX, i-j). When he moves house, he uses 
heavy wagons to transport his tent, his furniture, and his family. 
Clay models of these wagons have been found in Panticapaean tombs 
of the first century A. D. 

I infer from all this evidence, that the Bosphorans of the Roman 
period adopted the customs and the land system of nomadic peoples. 
Their land system must have been taken from the Scythians : the 
Sarmatian system cannot have differed much from the Scythian. 
Owing to the uncertainty of life in the steppes, the Greek method of 
tilling the soil was out of the question. The labourers and harvesters 
had to be protected by a military force, and the only persons who 
could provide this military force were the great landed proprietors. 
Their armed retainers guarded the herds in winter and summer. In 
spring, master and servants went out to the domain, to protect the 
natives, who lived a miserable life in caves or huts, and to enable them 
to work on the land. The harvest was shared between master and 
serfs : the master carried off his share, the serfs hid theirs in grain pits. 

This land system presupposes a social structure of feudal type, 
a state composed like the Scythian of a king, an armed aristocracy' 
with armed followers, and a more or less numerous body of serfs. 
We must suppose that the precariousness of life, in the later Hellenistic 
and the Roman periods, gradually reduced the Bosphoran state to 
this primitive and barbarous condition. I have no doubt that the 
Bosphoran army chiefly consisted of separate contingents under 
feudal chiefs, which were supplemented by forced levies from the 
serf farm-labourers, who were probably the native population of the 
country. Apart from the feudal lords, the only great landowners were 
the gods and the temples. I have already cited an inscription from 
Phanagoria which proves the. existence of extensive domains belonging 
to the gods and cultivated by serfs. The priests who looked after the 
serfs probably did not differ gready from the other feudal lords already 

3353 ¥ 


described, Strabo gives a similar account of the economic and social 
conditions in the great temples of Pontus and Cappadocia. 

The serf-reaped harvest passed into the hands of the kings, 
priests and great landowners : after feeding the city population, they 
exported the remainder, on the Bosphoran merchant fleet and on 
foreign trading vessels, to Greece, and especially to the Greek towns 
on the southern shore of the Black Sea. The traffic between Panti- 
capaeum and the cities of Pontus and Bithynia was livelier than ever 
before, as we know from the numerous Panticapaean inscriptions 
which mention citizens of Amisos, Sinope and other cities, domiciled 
at Panticapaeum. We should naturally suppose that the chief exporters 
of corn were the shipowners. But they were not alone. The kings 
and the rich landowners also maintained a considerable merchant 
fleet. From an inscription recently discovered at Gorgippia in the 
Taman peninsula, we learn that a religious corporation of naucleroi 
existed in this city t its honorary president being the king himself. 
The royal president bestowed a gift upon the corporation : it con- 
sisted in a large quantity of corn, reckoned in Persian artabai. 

The corn which was exported did not come exclusively from the 
territory of the kingdom. It is highly probable, that the Bosphoran 
naucleroi played the middleman between the foreign purchaser and 
the neighbours of the Bosphoran state, the Scythians of the Crimea 
and the Sarmatians in the district of the Kuban. Considering the 
political situation from the first to the third centuries A.D., I question 
whether the Don and Dnieper regions still produced a great quantity 
of corn for export. As early as the time of Polybius, who had the 
Dnieper region particularly in mind, the export of corn through 
Olbia and lyras was by no means regular, the Scythian power, which 
protected agriculture, having disappeared. It is possible, of course, 
that circumstances changed in the first century a.d, and subsequently : 
the geographer Ptolemy mentions scores of cities on the lower 
Dnieper, which shows that Olbia, under Roman protection, was able 
to recover part of the Dnieper trade. In any case, the existence of 
a firmly-established Scythian state in the Crimea, and the prolonged 
supremacy of the Sarmatians on the Kuban, created conditions m both 
places which furthered extensive production and active commerce. 
We must remember that these are the richest agricultural districts 
in modern Russia, and that they had been tenanted, from the earliest 
times, by a sedentary agricultural population, which changed masters, 
but itself remained unchanged. 1 he constant efforts of the Scythians, 
in the first three centuries of our era no less than in the three pre- 
ceding, to get possession of the Greek cities on the shores of the Black 


zr&- Z^pb§& 

— j" 



W «ui»*ir'W^> 


I — 1 1 Cent, a d. 


Sea, efforts which led to the appearance of Mithridates in the Crimea , 
to the expedition of Plautius Silvanus to rescue Chersonesus, to 
the military occupation of part of the Crimea by the Romans, to 
the war of Antoninus Pius with the Tauro-Scy thians for the liberation 
of Oibia, to innumerable contests between the Bosphoran kings 
and the Scythian state in the Crimea, show how anxious the Crimean 
Scythians were to rid themselves of these middlemen and to open 
direct relations with the purchasers of their corn. We have no 
right to suppose, that the Scythian state of Skiluros* successors 
was a nomadic and barbarous state. Ruins of a fortified town near 
Simferopol belong to the Roman period : to judge from Greek 
inscriptions found in the town, it was the centre of the Scythian 
kingdom as early as the first century b, c, and was even then in regular 
communication with the Olbian exporters. The ruins suggest that 
the Scythian kingdom of the Roman period did not greatly differ from 
the Bosphoran kingdom, except that it preserved its independence. 
The cemetery is full of Greek imports dating from the early centuries 
of our era, which show that the town had a Hellenized population 
and traded with the coastal cities. The Greek objects can hardly be 
due to Roman military occupation : for there are no inscriptions of 
Roman soldiers, such as we find in the fortress of Ai-Todor. 

Again, we have convincing evidence that life on the Kuban was 
not unlike life in the Crimea. A Bosphoran historian, used by 
Diodorus' authority, gives a picture of social life among the Siracians 
on the Kuban. The Siracians were a Sarmatian tribe, and it was 
probably they who dislodged the Scythians from the Kuban valley. 
Unhappily the reading in the text of Diodorus is corrupt : it was 
Mueller who proposed to read ItpaKtav, whereas Boeckh corrected 
the tyytfrav of the manuscripts into ftardtov. Speaking of the struggle 
between Eumelos and Satyros, the rival claimants to the Bosphoran 
throne in 309-308 B. c, the historian describes the fortified capital of 
King Aripharnes. The centre was occupied by the fortified palace 
of the king, which was surrounded by a wall, perhaps of stone. The 
palace was situated on a tongue of land formed by the River Thates. 
The town itself lay in the river marshes ; it was a settlement of the 
lacustrine or paludal type, supported by pillars and encircled by a 
wooden fortification, Diodorus also mentions another town of 
the same sort, Gargaza, and a number of less important towns and 
villages. The country, then, had a sedentary population, which was 
no doubt agricultural. The description is confirmed by another 
eye-witness, the same who furnished the authority used by Tacitus 
with his account of the expedition of Aquila against King Mithri- 


dates VII in a. d, 49 : the primary source is probably Aquila's own 
official report. This witness speaks of the same tribe, the Siracians, 
and describes the fortified town of King Zorsines, Uspe : again the 
same type of fortified royal residence. The most characteristic feature 
of the story is the proposal of King Zorsines to deliver ten thousand 
4 slaves ' to the conqueror in return for the lives of the * freemen * : 
these slaves were no doubt native serfs who worked for Sarmatian 

This information explains the finds in the Sarmatian cemeteries, 
described in the last chapter. As soon as they arrived in the region 
of the Kuban, the Sarmatians, as I have pointed out, established 
regular commercial relations with the Greek towns on the coast, 
Tanais, Phanagoria, Gorgippia, They bartered their corn, cattle and 
fish for the products of the Greek workshops. In a number of 
inscriptions, we read the names of merchants from Greek cities, who 
traded in the towns and villages of the country subject to the Sarma- 
tians. Some of these merchants died there. 

The ports of Theodosia and Chersonesus served as outlets for 
the produce of the Crimea ; Tanais, and the ports in the Tarn an 
peninsula, for the produce of the Sarmatian countries. We must bear 
in mind what Strabo expressly tells us about Sarmatian commerce, 
in particular that tlie great trade route from the East, which passed 
through the Russian steppes, was still used under Sarmatian supre- 
macy. We may be sure that it was the merchants of the Bosphoran 
kingdom who acted as middlemen between the caravans from Central 
Asia and the Greco-Roman world. 

Here was another source of wealth for the inhabitants of the 
Bosphorus. As long as the Bosphoran state, with the help of the 
Romans, controlled the Black Sea, the Scythians and the Sarmatians 
were necessarily dependent upon it, for they had neither navy nor 
merchant fleet. 

Agriculture and commerce, then, enriched the citizen aristocracy 
of the Bosphoran state : but the inhabitants of the kingdom had other 
means of acquiring wealth besides these. We have seen that the finds 
in the Sarmatian cemeteries point to a fairly prosperous industrial 
activity in the Bosphorus. We cannot affirm with certainty, that it was 
the workshops of Panticapaeum and other Bosphoran towns which 
supplied the Sarmatians with their pottery and their cut and blown 
glass. These may have been imported, although the examples of 
Gaul, Germany and Britain suggest that wherever there was a 
demand for such articles plenty ofiocal workshops arose to meet it. 
But we cannot doubt that the goldsmith's work exported by the 


Bosphoran cities was of local make. I have shown that goldsmiths 
flourished at Panticapaeum in the Spartocid epoch and produced 
large quantities of articles for the Scythian market. I am convinced 
that the same workshops continued to supply the Sarmatian demand. 
I shall return to the question when I come to discuss the Pantieapaean 
tomb furniture in this period. 

Thewealth of the city population , therefore, was derived fromagricul- 
ture , from commerce and from industry. We are pretty well acquainted 
with this class from inscriptions in tombs, from grave stelai and from 
lists of members of corporations. The city class was undoubtedly a 
real force. We are particularly struck, in examining its records, by its 
high organization and by its parade of Hellenism. The members were 
proud of belonging to the Greek race, and did their best not to forget 
the language, the literature, and the traditions of Greece. This is 
what impressed Dio Chrysostom at Olbia towards the end of the first 
century A. D., this is what we can gather from the Tristia and the 
Pontic letters of Ovid, who was forced to dwell, a needy exile, in the 
'Greek' city of Tomi, in the heart of the Dobrudzha, which, as we 
have already seen, remained a Scythian kingdom, like the kingdom of 
the Crimea, until it was occupied by the Romans. 

We find the same spirit at Panticapaeum and in the other cities 
of the Bosphoran kingdom. Wherever we turn, we are impressed by 
the societies formed by a population proud of its Hellenism. These 
Bosphoran colleges have been classed with the other colleges which 
were founded all over the Greek world. A grave error. I cannot 
discuss this important question in detail, but I must lay stress on 
certain significant points. The synods (crwoSoi) or brotherhoods 
(iTvi^iQtXfilai) which existed in all Bosphoran towns, especially those 
which were most exposed to attacks from their neighbours, Tanais, 
Gorgippia and Panticapaeum, present themselves to us, first, as 
religious fraternities centring in the official cult of the Great God 
and probably in that of the Great Goddess ; secondly, as unions of 
a limited number of families, that is, as aristocratic and purely 
citizen unions ; thirdly, as clubs closely connected with the royal 
family and the court ; fourthly, as military and political organizations, 
the members of which are always represented in military costume and 
armed as infantrymen or mounted hoplites, often on horseback, 
attended by a squire ; fifthly, as colleges which provided their 
members, especially the younger ones, the kowjcoi, with a Greek 
education in gymnasia and palaistrai ; colleges comparable with 
those of the Juvenes and vie* in other parts of the Greek world ; 
this effort to provide Greek education, in a town surrounded by 


barbarians, for the Greek or Hellenized youth, finds an interesting 
parallel in Egypt, where the class which had been educated in the 
gymnasium formed the city aristocracy and enjoyed a number of 
privileges ; sixthly and lastly, as burial societies, an important 
function in view of the military organization of the colleges : one is 
struck by the number of members who died young, defending their 
country on the field of battle. I am certain that these colleges were 
a product, and a curious one, of the historical development of the 
Bosphoran kingdom. The constant penetration of heterogeneous 
elements into the citizen society in the Greek towns, the perpetual 
danger of being submerged by their Scythian and Sarmatian neigh- 
bours, the economic and social situation which raised the Greeks to 
the position of a dominant class with hundreds of natives working 
for it, led the city populations to rally closely round the throne, 
in order to defend, if not their nationality, at least their civilization 
and their privileges. I am not quite sure that the form of these 
exclusively masculine colleges was borrowed wholesale from the 
Greeks. It seems very likely that colleges of young men existed in 
Italy, and among the Celts and Germans, from prehistoric times, 
and retained, though reconstituted by Augustus to suit his views and 
aims, a considerable measure of their primitive structure. It may be 
that the origin of the Bosphoran colleges was similar, that there was an 
institution of the same sort in the Iranian world. But this is not the 
place to examine this difficult and controversial question. 

It is clear, then, that the citizen class in the Bosphoran kingdom 
was highly organized, and formed an aristocracy which was princi- 
pally responsible for defending the kingdom from foreign attacks. 
These citizens probably formed the army of the Bosphoran kings. 
We do not know how the army was organized : perhaps in contingents 
furnished by the great landowners and by the various colleges in the 
towns : but we cannot be certain. The nucleus was composed of 
citizens ; but we may take it for granted that the Bosphoran kings 
tried to obtain assistance from semi -independent subject tribes and 
from * allied * tribes, that is to say, tribes which would serve for pay. 
The practice, which was adopted by Eumelos and Satyros in tneir 
fratricidal struggle, and later, by Dynamis and Aspurgos and by 
Mithridates VH, must have been continued by the Bosphoran kings 
from the first to the third century A, D. : when fighting the Scythians 
they had Sarmatian and Maeotian allies ; and inversely. The same 
system was employed by the Romans from the third or fourth century 
A. D., and regularly in the Hellenistic monarchies. A peculiar political 
and social organization, with a strange mixture of elements. 


I Cent* li. C. Hermitage.", Pclrograd 

Kerch, Royal Tumulus 
I — I I Cent A.r>. Hermitage, Peti'ograd 


I said above that the citizens of the Greek towns on the Black Sea 
were very anxious not to be confused with the barbarians. They 
counted themselves Greeks, and did their best to appear Greek and 
to be Greek. Greek was the only language used at f* anticapacum for 
public and private inscriptions and on coins. The citizens received 
a Greek education and were proud of it. Dio Chrysostom speaks of 
the reverence paid to Homer and Plato at Olbia. At Panticapaeum 
we have many funerary inscriptions in verse, which were assuredly 
composed in Panticapaeum itself. One of the finest commemorates 
the services rendered to the city of Nymphaeum by Glycaria, wife of 
Asandros, perhaps his first wife while he was still a private citizen ; 
it was found in the sea near Nymphaeum and has been published 
recently by myself and by SkorpiL Another inscription praises the 
scientific and educational attainments of a young Bosphoran. 

In spite of all this, the Hellenism of the citizen population in the 
Bosphorus seems to have been no more than a veneer, which wore 
thinner and thinner. It is true that the inscriptions are all Greek. 
But from the second century onwards we notice traces, even on official 
monuments, of a new system of writing which was probably used for 
texts in the native language. We observed, in the last chapter, that 
a number of objects from Sanaa t tan tombs are decorated with 
alphabetical signs of heraldic appearance, monograms which made one 
think of badges or coats of arms. From the second century b. c, we 
find the same signs, accompanying the names of kings, on stones with 
official inscriptions, on public documents, on inscribed tombstones, on 
certain coins, on horse trappings, on belt clasps, on strap mounts, and so 
forth. The strap mounts are in the openwork technique normal in 
Sarmatian objects of the kind. It is certain that these signs are private 
monograms, personal, family, or tribal devices. But elsewhere we have 
complete texts wxitten in signs which are partly identical with and 
partly similar to the signs described above : so on two funerary lions 
found at Olbia ; so on the entrance of a tomb at Kerch, where the 
inscription is placed on a lower layer of plaster, which was covered 
with an upper, painted layer. I have no cloubt that these are the first 
stages in the development of a Sarmatian system of writing. Let us 
remember that the Hittite hieroglyphic writing developed in the same 
manner out of badge-like signs : this has been shown by Sayce and 
by Cowley, and de Linas has already compared the Bosphoran signs 
with Persian. A significant testimony to the importance of the 
Iranian element in the citizen population : for it was the Bosphoran 
nobles who built these' sumptuous carved and painted tombs. 

The testimony is confirmed by an analysis of the proper names at 


Panticapaeum, at Olbia, at Tanais, at Phanagoria, at Gorgippia. It 
would not be difficult to produce statistics, which would show the 
rate at which, in the Roman period, native names gradually supplanted 
the Greek names which predominated in p re-Roman times. But a 
glance at the college lists and at the names of members of colleges on 
tombstones, will suffice to prove that the population was losing its 
Hellenic character. It is curious that the Bosphorans become Jess 
and less inclined to substitute Greek names for their native names, 
and that the reverse was probably the rule : native names were 
substituted for Greek ones. The native names have been studied by 
Vsevolod Miller : he shows that they are mostly Iranian, and expli- 
cable by comparison with Ossetian. But I have lately drawn attention 
to an equally significant fact : side by side with the Iranian, we have 
a group of names which are undoubtedly Thracian, both in formation 
and in type. Others are typical of Asia Minor : but these are very few. 
It appears, therefore, that the Greek citizen population was gradually 
submerged by Iranian and Thracian elements. The Iranians were 
the Scythians of the Crimea and t even more, the Sarmatians : the 
Thracians must have come from the Maeotian tribes, which as we 
have seen, had been strongly Thracized by the Cimmerians. It was 
unquestionably the aristocracy among the Sarmatians, Scythians and 
Maeotians, which was attracted towards the former Greek centres. 
Remember Lucian's descriptions of life at the Bosphoran court in 
the Hellenistic and Roman periods : a kaleidoscopic picture of 
Scythians, Sarmatians, and Bosphorans, intermarrying, making friends, 
quarrelling. We may be sure that the citizen aristocracy acted like 
the others, and that there was constant coming and going between the 
cities of the Bosphorus and the neighbouring tribes, interrupted by 
frequent but by no means sanguinary wars. The difference between 
the Bosphoran kingdom, as I have already pointed out, and the 
Scythian or Sarmatian kingdoms was not very great ; but the life 
of the Greek cities had a strong fascination for the Iranians, who 
came to trade, to make agreements, to visit kinsfolk, and the like. 

It was natural, under these conditions, that the city population 
rapidly became Iranized. It is unfortunate that we know very little 
about the costume of the Panticapaeans in the pre- Roman period : 
the stelai of this period are few, and. they never bear the effigy of the 
dead. But we have every reason to suppose that their costume was 
Greek like their names and their tombs. In the Roman period the 
material becomes very plentiful, especially in the first and second 
centuries A. D. A series of carved and sometimes painted funeral 
stelai (pi. XXX, 2), and an equally rich series of tombs with painted 




walls, present us with hundreds of portraits of Bosphoran citizens, in 
civil and in military costume. Their garments at this period are far 
from Greek. They wear trousers, sort leather shoes, leather or fur 
doublets, and long cloaks probably of wool : just like the Scythians and 
the Sarmatians on monuments of the fourth or third century b. c. 
Ovid at Tomi, Dio Chrysostom at Olbia, can hardly recognize the 
descendants of the ancient Milesian colonists. 

The armour is no longer Greek. No doubt the mercenary armies 
of the Spartocid period were armed like the Greek hoplites, peltasts 
and cavalrymen of the time. But as early as the third or second 
century B. c, when the mercenaries were mainly recruited from the 
barbarian tribes, a change took place : it affected even the armour of 
the citizen troops, which now began to play an important part. 
A number of clay statuettes from this period, found exclusively at 
Panticapaeum, and undoubtedly made there, represent soldiers of the 
citizen army (pi. XXX, 1) : their costume is Thraco-Iranian, their 
shields Gaulish. In the first and second centuries A. 0. , we have an abun- 
dance of documents for the armour of the citizen troops and of the 
contingents recruited among the native population. Hundreds of stelai 
reproduce the heroized dead in complete armour (pi. XXX, 2) : mural 
paintings in tombs, the battles of the Bosphoran army with the Scythians 
and theTaitrians (pi. XXIX). The armour is the same everywhere. 
The cavalryman, and the Bosphoran nobles are almost always cavalry, 
has a conical metal helmet ; a corslet of scale- or ring-armour ; a 
long lance ; a dagger fastened to the leg, with a ring on the top as 
in the Kuban tombs ; a sword w T ith a round stone pommel and a stone 
lard ; a bow ; a gorytus ; and a shield, small in the cavalry, large in 
e infantry : a combination of Scythian and Sarmatian panoply, with 
redominance of the characteristic Sarmatian weapons, as they are 
represented on Trajan's column and on the arch ofGalerius atSalonica. 
Infantry plays little part in the Bosphoran army. It consists of peltasts, 
generally without corslets, armed with lances, javelins, shields and 
sometimes bows. The tactics are also Sarmatian. Heavily armed 
warriors, cataphracts, fighting tourney-wise in single combat, or 
phalanx pitted against phalanx : harbingers of the Middle Ages. The 
same armour is found in the tombs of the period. 

Our principal source of information for the material culture of the 
Bosphoran citizens is as usual the tombs. Thousands have been 
excavated. They bear witness, first of all, to great prosperity on the 
Bosphorus during the first two centuries of our era. The sepulchral 
structures are varied and sumptuous. There are three main types. 
One continues the old Greek tradition : a tomb dug in the earth ; 



the body was enclosed in a wooden coffin or a stone sarcophagus and 
deposited in the tomb. The walls of the trench sometimes have a 
revetment of dressed stone, and dressed stone is used for roof and 
floor. I know very few certain examples of cremation : inhumation 
is the rule. The trench was covered with a small mound which was 
topped by a carved and painted stele. These stelai mostly belong 
to the first century a. d., some to the second, none, as far as I know, to 
the third. Nearly all the stelai were used again, and have been found 
embodied in funeral structures of the second and third centuries. 
There are slight variants of this type : I shall not discuss them. 

The second type of grave was introduced in the latter half 
of the third century b. €., but is rare in the Hellenistic period : it 
appears to be of Pontic origin. In the soft rock on the chain of 
Mount Mithri dates at Panticapaeum, or in the clay elsewhere, a tomb 
chamber was cut, sometimes with double berths, both berths cut in 
the rock or clay. The chambers were approached by a shaft, some- 
times very deep, and a corridor. The bodies were placed in the berths, 
often enclosed in wooden coffins. The graves are always family graves 
and were frequently re-employed. The walls of the tombs were often 
coated with stucco and painted. 

The third type takes up the old Spartocid tradition : monumental 
tumulary chambers, of dressed stone, with barrel vaults. They are 
often sculptured without and painted within. These also were 
family graves, belonging to Bosphoran aristocrats. We know the 
occupants of some of them. The dead were laid in wooden coffins, 
in sarcophagi of dressed stone, or in hermetically sealed sarcophagi. 

All these types of tomb must have been very costly and show 
that the inhabitants were wealthy. The same types appear in the 
cemeteries of the other Greek cities on the Black Sea ; the tumulary 
graves at Olbia more than elsewhere, but fewer and less rich than on 
the Bosphorus. 

The funerary ritual is everywhere the same as before. In all three 
types, the tomb furniture is astonishingly rich and varied. Un- 
happily, the tumulary and chamber graves have almost always been 
pillaged, and it is only the trenches that are usually found intact. The 
dead were furnished with everything that might be useful in the other 
world. Garments ; mortuary crowns ; jewels ; baskets of fruit, 
especially nuts ; baskets of eggs, the funerary significance of which 
is well known ; toilet boxes ; terra-cottas, often quaint representations 
of strange beings, probably evil geniuses — perhaps personifications 
of diseases — like those found in contemporary Chinese graves ; toys 
and games, for instance a complete set of duodecim scripta ; coins ; 


gold plaques struck from coins ; and so forth. Weapons are some- 
times found in men's tombs, but chiefly from the second century a. d. 
onwards. It is significant that from the first century a, d. metal bridle- 
pieces are found in a number of tombs : the custom is thoroughly 

As before, most of the objects buried with the dead are imports. 
But some are certainly local work. We shall begin with the tombs 
themselves. The grave stelai, and the decorative sculpture of the 
tombs, were certainly executed in Panticapaeum and the other Greek 
cities. The art of the sculptors is not purely Greek ; the style is 
decadent Ionian, at once heavy and dry. There is a notable propensity 
towards naturalism and realism, which shows itself particularly in the 
care with which every detail of costume and armour is rendered. 
I do not know, whether the same can be said of the racial type. As 
before, the tomb chambers were decorated with painting, and some- 
times the stone sarcophagi and stelai as well. The paintings are 
assuredly local work, and are very interesting. I have discussed them 
in a special treatise and I shall say only a few words about them here. 
The old Greek style of mural decoration was retained in the first 
century : the architectural style. But from the second half of the 
first century onwards, its place was taken by two Oriental styles : one, 
the floral style, probably came from Egypt ; the other, the incrustation 
style, was purely Asiatic ; heavy, richly coloured, pompous, a style 
created in the palaces of the Asiatic monarehs, a style in which archi- 
tectural form, variety of hue, and fineness of detail are all killed by 
colour. Artists began * to paint with marbles * (marmoribus pingere), 
and to imitate this painting in paint. This style was to conquer 
the Roman world, and it was in this style that the Christian churches 
were to be decorated* 

The tombs were painted with figures and scenes : but look at the 
scenes. The art is no longer Greek, Animals, plants, real and mythical 
persons, can only be compared with Parthian and Sassanid monuments 
(pi. XXX, 2, 3). 

Characteristic, also, of the Bosphoran tombs, are the coffins, boxes, 
and other objects of wood. The finest specimens may have been 
brought from Asia or Syria, although it is not very likely. But even 
if they w r ere imported, these objects will always have a singular value, 
as almost unique specimens of the once flourishing art of marquetry. 
More well-preserved examples have been found in South Russia than 
anywhere else. It was an old custom at Panticapaeum to bury the 
wealthy and noble dead in wooden coffins worthy of them, carved* 
gilded and painted. We found such coffins as early as the Spartocid 


period. It is to be regretted that Hellenistic and Roman marquetry 
has never been properly studied. Watzineer, who published a book 
on the subject, says hardly anything about this period. It is interesting 
to find, in the Hellenistic and Roman times, especially in the first 
century B. c. and the first A. D n a process which has been common in 
the East down to our own day : the insertion of ornamental inlay of 
a different colour, in wood, glass, stone or metal, into the plain surface 
of the wooden object. In the first century a. d., sarcophagi were 
hardly ever painted or decorated with figure subjects. Painting is 
replaced by incrustation, figure subjects by geometric and floral 
ornaments. The old fashion was revived much later, in the second 
century A.d. ; very ugly coffins, decorated with plaster or clay figures 
glued to the sides, I do not know the origin of the incrusted sarco- 
phagi : in any case they help to show that there was a pronounced 
taste at Panticapaeum for rich and varied polychromy : further 
evidence will be furnished by the jewellery. 

I now'proceed to speak of Panticapaean jeweller)' in the Roman 
period. Trie Panticapaean tombs are as rich as before in gold and 
silver objects. It is difficult to distinguish the local jewels From the 
imported. But I have already pointed out, that the existence of a 
school of goldsmiths at Panticapaeum in Greek and Hellenistic 
times suggests that a large proportion of the jewels were local work 
and not imported. From the second century b. c, what distinguishes 
Panticapaean and, in general, Bosphoran goldsmith's work, is the taste 
for polychromy. This taste is already very noticeable in a find which 
is certainly as old as the second, if not the third century B.C., the 
sumptuous tombs at Artyukhov's farm in the Taman peninsula ; in 
graves of the same period at Gorgippia ; and in a group of finds at 
Panticapaeum, which cannot be enumerated here, but which date 
from the second, perhaps even from the end of the third century b. c. 
Thenceforth the series is uninterrupted. 

I spoke of the taste for polychromy in the last chapter. It is 
general all over the ancient world in late Hellenistic and Imperial 
times, but the South Russian finds are richer, more numerous, more 
varied and more ancient than any others. I do not wish in the least 
to suggest, that the polychrome style in jewellery arose and developed 
in South Russia, and spread thence over the Roman Empire, The 
love of polychromy prevailed throughout the classic East, in Egypt 
as well as in Mesopotamia, Syria, and the Iranian world. I he 
Oriental ization of taste, the result of the later Hellenistic period, and 
the participation of non-Greek races, eastern and western, with their 
love of brilliancy and pomp — observe the affection of the Celts for 


polychrome ornaments — in the civilized life of the Greco-Roman 
world, led to that change of psychology which has been well charac- 
terized by Alois Riegl. But I do maintain that South Russia was one 
of the centres, in which polychromy developed early, and indepen- 
dently of the other centres of ancient jewellery ; and assumed special 
forms which brought about the new style commonly called Gothic. 

Even after what I said in the preceding chapter, I shall allow 
myself to return once more to this question, because it is extremely 
important for us, if we wish to appreciate the part which the Bosphorus 
played in the history of civilization during the period of the migrations 
ana the early Middle Ages. 

The characteristic feature of the polychrome style at Panticapaeum 
and in the Sarmatian world — for the same objects are found in both 
places, and it cannot be doubted that the Bosphoran workshops 
furnished the Sarmatian world with most of its jewellery — is not 
merely the use of precious stones to adorn jewels, or rather the 
predominance of the stone in the goldsmith s art, which is now 
principally concerned with providing artistic settings for one or more 
gems ; but something more important and more distinctive. The 
speciality of Panticapaean and Sarmatian jewellery does not lie in 
providing settings for precious stones, but in the incrustation of gold 
objects, in ornamenting the surface with gems and cut stones, occasion- 
ally enamels. The surface gradually loses its independence and 
becomes no more than a field for incrustation, for the production 
of polychrome effects. The goldsmith uses inset gems of various 
shapes and sizes ; the same stones cut to the required shape j and glass 
and enamel of various hues. The result is a kind of carpet made of 
precious stones, in which the scheme and arrangement of colours is 
all, while the form of the objects themselves, and their geometric, 
floral, or animal ornamentation, play hardly any part. Polychrome 
effect is now the alpha and omega of the Panticapaean jeweller. 

This tendency in jewellery, as I have already pointed out, is by 
no means new. It is to be observed in South Russia during the 
archaic period. The Kelermes find, the finds of Vettersfelde, of 
Tomakovka on the lower Dnieper, of theGolden Tumulusin the Crimea, 
furnish characteristic specimens of this Oriental style, in which enamel 
and precious stones are employed side by side to enliven the surface 
of gold objects. But at this period the polychrome decoration was 
subordinated to the form and ornamentation of the objects themselves. 
Towards the fifth century, this style disappears in South Russia : a few 
survivals, discreet touches of colour, occur in some jewels of the 
fourth and third centuries : but these are exceptions. The style as 


such develops in the East, in Iranian lands, as we see from the Oxus 
and Susa treasures. It returns to South Russia with the Sarmatians. 
It reappears in the Orenburg steppes during the fourth century B, c, 
and influences Panticapaean jewellery by the third, witness the 
Taman and Kuban finds just described, and the others analysed in 
the preceding chapter. The enamelled sword sheath From Buerova 
Mogilain the Taman peninsula (pi. XXIV, 4}, the round brooch from 
the grave at Artyukhov's farm, the gold roundels, dotted with precious 
stones, from Kurjips, the gold openwork mounting of a vase or 
rhyton from Besleneevskaya : all these lead on to the nnds of the first 
century B. C, and of Roman imperial times, from Panticapaeum and 
from the Russian steppes, in which the polychrome style eventually 
triumphs, and incrustation prevails over the form and decoration of 
the ouject. The result of this victory we have already seen in the 
finds from Novocherkassk and from western Siberia. But the same 
phenomenon may be observed at Panticapaeum. 

To ascertain the true nature of Panticapaean jewellery in the 
Roman period, we must make a rather closer examination of certain 
very characteristic finds which have often been quoted but never 
thoroughly investigated. In the first century a. d., and in the earlier 
part of the second, the tombs of Panticapaeum present almost 
the same picture as contemporary tombs elsewhere. I have already 
observed, that the citizens of the Bosphonis, notwithstanding the 
progress of Iranization, were strongly attached to their Greek nation- 
ality; the objects which they liked to take with them into their tombs 
were such as bore hardly any local stamp : those which did were 
reserved for export. In the second century, however, a profound 
change takes place. Iranization has borne its fruit. Trie tomb 
furniture comes more and more to resemble that of the tombs in the 
valleys of the Kuban and the Don. By the third century, one might 
be in the heart of Sarmatian country. These tombs can often be 
dated by imprints of coins on gold funerary crowns. 

I shall first speak of three exceptionally rich tombs discovered in 
1837 and 1841. The two tombs of 1841 were stone chambers sur- 
mounted by tumuli : the third, of 1837, found in the same district 
but under another tumulus, was a marble sarcophagus, not interred 
in the virgin soil, but in the soil of the tumulus : the lid of the sarco- 
phagus was shaped like a pediment with an acroterion. To give an 
idea of the wealth of the furniture, I shall briefly enumerate the objects 
of which it consisted, adding references to the publications. In the 
1837 tomb, the tomb of the Queen with the Golden Mask : a grave- 
mask of gold (Aniiqidtis du Bosphore Cimmfrien, pi. I) ; a silver 


sceptre (pi. II, 5) ; a gold funerary crown (pi. Ill, 4) ; a pair of gold 
ear-pendants; a gold circlet like that on plate XI, 6 ; two gold 
bracelets (pi. XIV, 4) ; three gold rings (pis. XV, 3 and XVIII, 19) ; 
a simple ran, of gold ; a distafT (pi. XXX, 8) ; a bridle (pi. XXIX,i- 7 ); 
a red leather purse, with a figure of a bird cutout of leather and applied; 
two small fibulae, one of gold, the other of bronze ; beads of glass 
and of cornelian ; a gold bottle (pi. XXIV, 25) ; a number of garnets 
mounted in bezels ; a gold medallion (pL LXXXV, 8) ; several 
hundreds of small stamped plaques in gold (pi r XXII, 1 , 3, 4, 6, 22, 25 ; 
pi. XXII I, 10-12 and 14). A great quantity of silver plate ; two vases 
with reliefs (pi. XXXVII, 1 and 2) ; another, plain ; two cups with 
feet and without handles ; a large covered cup ; a pyxis for cosmetic ; 
two spoons (pi. XXX, 3 and 5); a round plate (pi, XXX, 11). In 
bronze : a basin (pL XLIV, 2) ; a bell (pi. XL1V, 8) ; a round seal ; 
two small bells (pf. XXXI, 1) ; a small pilaster (pi. XLIV, 15) ; two 
lion's paws, feet of a vase ; remains of a dagger, and of a knife with 
a gold filigree mount. 

One of the stone chambers discovered in 1841 had a stepped vault, 
the other a barrel vault. As far as can be ascertained from the drawings 
published by Ashik (Bosphoran Kitigdom, ii, pis. IV and V), neither 
chamber was constructed for its ultimate occupant : they were both 
built in the fourth century b. c. and re-employed ; this explains the 
discovery, in the second tomb, of a painted vase with reliefs, of an 
alabastron, and of a mirror, which belong to the fourth century B. c, 
and present a strong contrast to the furniture found in the coffin. In 
the first tomb, which was a man's, a wooden coffin, plated with lead, 
was found intact, and the furniture complete. The furniture consisted 
of a gold funerary crown, a counterpart to the Queen with the Mask's 
(A. B.C. pi. 111,3) ; a tunic embroidered with gold ; a sword, a long 
spear, a knife blade, with remains of a gold mount, a dagger (pi. XXVII, 7), 
a whetstone, a bridle like that of the Queen with the Mask (Ashik, 
Bosphormi Kingdom^ iii, fig. 209 a-e), a gold plaque (pi, XXIV, 16), 
and two gold imprints from a coin of Rhescuporis II (a. d. 212-29), 
The other chamber contained a woman's body, also in a wooden 
coffin : a gold funeral crown (pi. Ill, 5), a necklace (pi. X, 3), brace- 
lets of gold wire, gold lion's head earrings, two gold rings, one set with 
a garnet, and the painted vase, mentioned above, belonging to the 
fourth century B. c. (pi. LVIII, 6, 2). 

I must also mention the tomb excavated in 1910, which contained 
a gold crown exactly similar to those in the grave of the Queen with 
the Mask and in the man's tomb of 184 1. if we look closely at the 
three tombs, we see that they must have belonged to members of one 


family. The objects certainly came from the same workshops* 
First of all the crowns : the crowns of the warrior and of the Queen 
with the Mask make a pair, and the workmanship is exactly the 
same : the representations on the plaques in front are likewise 
pendants, as I have shown in a special article. The crown in the 
woman's tomb of 1841 is of the same work as the others, and has the 
same square plaque in front, although the ornamentation is different. 
The two brief les, the Queen's and the warrior's, are almost identical : 
the same badge-like monogram appears on parts of the gold plating ; 
it was probably, as I said above, a kind of family device. The gold 
circlet of the Queen with the Mask closely resembles the bracelets of 
the woman in the tumulus of 1841. And so forth. It cannot be 
doubted that the three tombs belong not only to the same period but 
to the same family. 

The date of the tombs was established by Ashik and Stephani 
at the time of the discovery. The tomb of the Queen with the Mask 
contained the famous silver plate with the words ^ao-tXe'^s 'Pijo-mw- 
Tt6p€t ( = 'P^o-KowroptSo? , the genitive in -ei being common in the 
Bosphorus) incised in dots, and the indication of the weight, finally 
deciphered by Zahn with the help of information supplied by Pridik 
and myself. The plate belonged, then, to King Rhescupons. The 
date of the king is fixed by the monogram engraved in the centre and 
round the rim of the plate : it is composed of the letters ante. 
Instead of *Ain{t£yov) /J^ao-iAeW) which would give a date incom- 
patible with the style, Zahn proposes to read 'Avr^vctuou) /^aoxXc'ft*)- 
I entirely agree with this reading, especially as the monogram 
seems to me to contain all the letters of the name * kvt(hiv*lvav) or 
*Avr{aam.vos). The Antoninus meant is undoubtedly Caracal! a, 
as Zahn saw, and the plate is one of the regular gifts which the 
Roman emperors presented to their Bosphoran vassals. The lady 
buried in the tomb of 1837 was therefore a member of the family 
of King Rhescuporis II, Caracalla's contemporary : perhaps she was 
the king's wife and died before him. The date is corroborated by 
imprints, found in the tomb of 1841, from coins of the same king, 
I am inclined to think that this lordly tomb, though built in the fourth 
century for some one else, was the tomb of the king himself ; his 
second wife or his concubine being buried beside him, I have laid 
stress upon this date, because Kubitschek has recently questioned 
it ; he wishes to assign the three tombs to a much later period, the 
fourth century A. d. His arguments are extremely flimsy : he is 
clearly anxious to confirm his own dating of the Siebenbrunnen 
tomb, which I shall discuss later. He accordingly attributes the 


Kerch tombs to the Gothic epoch. But there cannot be the least 
doubt that they are pre-Gothic, that the first belongs to the period 
a.d. 212-29, and the two others to A.D. 229, the date of the death 
of Rhescuporis II : that is, some decades before the appearance of 
the Goths. 

The furniture of these tombs is astonishingly similar to that of the 
Sarmatian tombs on the Kuban. The funerary ritual is the same, the 
bridle occurs in both, and the objects have the same shapes. Look at 
die gold bottle, which recurs at Ust-Labinskaya, at Novocherkassk 
and at Olbia (fig. 19, 1-2 from the Kuban ; 3, from the grave of the 
Queen) ; the characteristic gold garment plaques, regular in Sarma- 
tian tombs (fig. 17) ; the bracelets and tores, of the same type as the 
Sarmatian ; the distinctive armour of the king, with the great spear 
predominating ; the shape and decoration of the dagger. The clasp 
of the necklace, in the form of a ram ornamented with false filigree, 
reappears in many of the tombs on the Kuban : the type of bridle, 
with rings, is the same ; the monogram devices also ; the same 
technical processes are used, embossing, and pseudo-granulation com- 
bined with inlaid stones. Finally, a highly developed style of poly- 
chrome jewellery. I must also notice the striking resemblance between 
the funeral crown of the lady in the tumulus of 1841, and the crown 
from Novocherkassk. The plaque in front of the lady's crown is 
divided into nine compartments, which are decorated with embossed 
geometrical patterns, very primitive and very characteristic of Sarmatian 
art as a whole ; seven of the compartments are embellished with 
inlaid precious stones, three of which are chalcedony cameos of the 
first century A. D. The Syriam garnet, with a female head, which 
forms the centre-piece of the lady s necklace, may belong to the third 
century and may represent the deceased herself. 

Let us now examine the polychrome style of the gold objects found 
in these tombs. It is much richer and much more highly developed 
than in the Kuban finds, and vies with the polychrome style at 
Novocherkassk and in Siberia. Stones are inlaid everywhere, even in 
the funeral crowns. Compare the gold bottle of the Queen with the 
Mask and the gold bottle from Ust-Labinskaya : the Queen's bottle 
is thickly studded with precious stones. Look at the two bridles : 
embossed work like that on the crown described above, and precious 
stones inlaid all over it. 

But there are two other features to which I would draw attention. 
The king's dagger was richly ornamented, like the knife in the same 
tomb and the dagger of the queen. The hilt is coated with gold foil, 
and bears the same monogram device as the bridle : it is studded 

*353 a a 


with carnelians fixed in bezels. The flat pommel is a chalcedony with 
a gold rosette in the middle : the rosette is enriched with enamel and 
coloured pastes forming a mosaic design, The same combination, 
then, of proto-cloisonne and inlaid stones as is typical of the Gothic 

The other feature is the entire absence of decoration in the animal 
style, which we found abundantly represented in Siberia and at 
Novocherkassk, and much less abundantly on the Kuban, The 
western variety of the polychrome style is developing before our eyes : 
it will presently start from Panticapaeum to conquer the world. 

It has always been recognized that the Kerch finds which I have 
just analysed are of the greatest importance for determining the origin 
of the Gothic or Merovingian style of jewellery. The close affinity of 
the two styles is undeniable . No one will dispute the significance of the 
conclusions which we have now reached : first, that the finds analysed 
date from the beginning of the third century, that is, from the pre- 
Gothic period ; secondly, that they are connected with a series of much 
more ancient finds, which we have every justification for assigning to 
the Sarmatians, and which go back as far as the fourth century B. c, 
and form an uninterrupted sequence. 

Let us now return to Bosphoran civilization. The tomb furniture 
of the second and third centuries A. D. agrees with the rest of our 
evidence in pointing to progressive, almost precipitate Iranization at 
Panticapaeum and in the Bosphorus generally. It is difficult to think 
of the family tombs of Rhescuporis II as belonging to persons who 
spoke Greek and called themselves Greeks, These persons were 
Iranians, Sarmatians, with a veneer of Hellenism. It was mainly in 
the second century that the transformation took place. This is proved 
by a number of tombs which I have no time to describe. I refer the 
reader to Ernst von Stern's careful description of one of these 
monumental chambers, or to Ashik's of a chamber with fourteen 
wooden coffins, one of which contained a crown w T ith an imprint 
from a coin of Marcus Aureliu s_ ( A. D. 171), a nd a number of typical 
Sarmatian plaques : or to the aiccount of the chamber discovered by 
Kareysha in 1842, which is dated by an imprint from a coin of Corn- 
modus. He will receive the same impression everywhere: Hellenism, 
still strong in the first century A. D., was now in complete decline : the 
Iran i an world was overwhelm ! n g the Greek. 

"Tt remains to say a few words about religion and worship in the 
Bosphoran kingdom during Roman times. I have already spoken of 
the power wielded by native, especially Maeotian cults, in the Asiatic 
portion of the Bosphorus during the Greek and Hellenistic periods. 


I have mentioned the cult of the Great Goddess , which in Greek 
disguise continued to be the principal cult among the Greek and native 
population. With this cult, as we have seen, was associated that of 
the Great God, The only native names of these deities which are 
preserved are Sanerges and Astara, names which remind us of Hittite 
Asia Minor : they appear in a Hellenistic inscription. 

In the Roman period, the part which the Great Goddess plays in 
the coinage of Dynatnis points to a resurrection or a fresh manifesta- 
tion of die ancient beliefs. I pointed out that the old sanctuaries of 
the Goddess never ceased to exist, and that they were protected by 
the sovereigns of the Bosphorus. At Panticapaeum, as everywhere 
else, the Roman epoch was a period of r eligious syncretism. But 
through all this syncretism the Great Goddess preserves her dominant 
position. It is true that Demeter and Persephone were chthonic 
divinities above everything else, and it is not surprising to find them 
in tombs, as defenders of the dead in the world beyond the grave. 
The presence of Orphic influence is also natural, considering the 
importance of Orphism in the Roman period. Nevertheless, it 
may well have been due to native influence, to the cult of the Great 
Goddess, that the scenes depicted in the tombs are taken almost 
exclusively from the Eleusino-Orphic cycle. At the period when 
native influence in the Bosphorus becomes strongly marked, in the 
second and third centuries A. D., there was a vigorous revival of the 
cult of the Great Goddess in the official religion. We have seen that 
the Great Goddess, the patroness of the kingdom, appears on the 
reverse of nearly all Bosphoran bronze coins from the third century 
onwards. At Cnersonesus we find the same. 

But side by side with the worship of the Great Goddess, the 
worship of the Great God increases in importance, and is coupled 
with a noticeable tendency towards monotheism. The chief divinity 
revered by the official colleges was the supreme God, &tb* "t^ktto^. 
He appears in the barbarous tomb paintings of the third century a. D. f 
accompanied by orgiasts engaged in ritual acts. It has been proposed, 
on the strength of analogies from Asia Minor, to attribute this cult 
to the influence of the Jewish and Thracian religions, to see in it a 
syncretism of Sabaziasts and Sabbathiasts. Itjsj rue that there w T as 
a po werful Jewish ^ ojo ny in the Bosphorus by the first century A. D.^ 
it proJaably-i^rxie_j ^iTAsia M in or. B ut here as everywhere, the~ 
Jewish colony kept tcTitselt. Hardly any Jewish names occur in the 
college lists : and yet it was the members of the colleges who were 
the principal votaries of the Great God. I believe, therefore, that in 
South Russia the cult of the 6«os "T^urro? was related, first and 


foremost, to the cult of Sabazios, the supreme god of the Thraci arts, 
especially as it has recently been shown, that the Sabbathiasts them- 
selves had nothing to do with Jewish religion, but were connected 
with a cult of the Great Goddess of Asia Minor and her consort. The 
arguments of Schurer and of Cumont fail to convince me that the 
Jewish beliefs exercised a dominant influence on the Bosphorus ; 
the tendency to monotheism, and to moralization of the gods, was 
general at the Roman period, especially in the East. On the other 
hand, the figure of Sabazios appears in the Bosphoran tombs 
described above, his cult is found in the Caucasus, and it was probably 
he who gave rise to the Bosphoran coin types of the fourth century B.C., 
the silen and the satyr. Moreover, there was a powerful Thracian 
element in the Bosphoran population, and the deity who has most 
affinity with the god Sanerges is along with Sandas of Asia Minor, 
god of wine and prosperity, the mystic Thracian god Sabazios, I con- 
sider, therefore, that the ©€b« *TV«rros of the Bosphoran inscriptions, is 
the supreme god of the native population, a syncretism of the Iranian 
Ahuramazda and of the Thracian Sabazios, who was influenced, in 
his turn, by the consort of the Great Goddess of Asia Minor. 

In conclusion : our study has shown, that the Roman period was 
a period of real renaissance in the Bosphoran kingdom and in the 
Greek colonies on the Black Sea. Under Roman protection, Hellenism, 
which had been almost stifled by Iranism, began to revive and to 
prosper. But Iranization, undefeated, returned to the attack and 
took possession of the Greek city life in all its branches. The Iranian 
world exercised a powerful effect upon the political and social life 
of the Greek colonies, upon their religion, their art and their industry. 
By the time that Roman protection ceased to be the principal factor, 
the process of Iranization was almost completed. But the.fysion_of_ 
^Iram sm and Hellenism did noti nvolve the suppression of Hellenism : 
it was~a true fusion, and the outcome was a mixed civHizlitldfr^rjf" 
singular complexity and interest. The northern tribes who mingled 
with this world in the third century A. D., and who had long been 
penetrating into its midst, were faced by a civilization which was far 
higher than theirs. They naturally learned from it and made it their 
own. We must not forget, that there is no evidence of the Sarmatians 
having been conquered and subjugated by the Goths. The relation 
between the two was rather that of co-operation and alliance : in 
military matters, the Goths were the stronger ; the Sarmatians were 
the cultivated element. The result of this fusion will be made clear 
in the next chapter. 



MY purpose in writing this chapter is not to compile a history of 
the polychrome and animal styles. The task could only be 
accomplished by a specialist, in a comprehensive and copiously 
illustrated work of several volumes. My own task is a much more 
modest one. I wish to indicate, in a few pages, the influence exerted 
upon Central Europe by Greco-Iranian South Russia, during the 
formation of two styles which are of the utmost importance for the 
historian of mediaeval art : the polychrome style of the period of 
migrations, and the animal style of the Germanic North. 

Much has been written on these problems. The steps in the 
evolution of the two styles, from the fourth century A. D. onwards, 
have been established ; of the objects which exhibit these styles, 
especially the fibulae and the clasps, from a much earlier period. The 
origin of the styles has often been discussed. There are several 
conflicting theories about the polychrome style. One theory, that it 
is of purely Germanic origin, is almost abandoned. The theory of 
Oriental origin, proposed hy de Lin as and Odobesco, was stated in 
such vague terms that it has hardly affected the discussion. The third 
theory, the most widely current, is Riegl's : he attributes the appear- 
ance of the polychrome style to a general change of taste, of stylistic 
feeling, of artistic psychology, in the Roman world of Imperial times. 
Certain discoveries at Kerch, which I have not mentioned hitherto, 

five rise to a modification of this theory. Ernst von Stern, Ebert, 
einecke, and Kossinna believed that the new feeling was particularly 
strong at Panticapaeum ; it was at Panticapaeum, they maintained, 
that the Goths encountered it, adopted it, and created the polychrome 
style of the Middle Ages, which they carried with them into Central 
Europe, altering it and perfecting it as they went. 

In the study of the animal style, Salin's book marked a new epoch. 
Salin made a thorough study of the evolution of this style, especially 
from the fourth century A. D. onwards : he pointed out the various 
stages by w T hich it was transformed into a geometric style, taking the i 
fibulae and clasps of the Germanic countries as his principal guides. 



On the question of origin he is less explicit, but he is inclined to 
think, that the chief motives of the northern animal style were mostly 
borrowed from late Roman art. I cannot discuss all these theories 
here : I shall merely adduce certain facts which may prove useful to 
future investigators. 

Let us begin with the polychrome style. Polychromy had never 
died out in the East : and from the Hellenistic period onwards, as we 
have already seen, there was a powerful revival of polychromy in the 
Iranian world. A similar revival took place in Semitic and Egyptian 
quarters at the same time. It is among the Sarmatians that we can 
best follow the revival of the polychrome style in its Iranian branch. 
Among the Sarmatians, who were in touch with the Greeks of South 
Russia, the style flourished with a vigour and an originality unequalled, 
as far as we can see, in any other part of the Hellenistic world . All 
the jewellery becomes polychrome. Various processes are employed : 
cloisonne, where the stones are enclosed by metal partitions ; open- 
work, where the coloured substance is inserted into a metal network ; 
champ leve, where the stones or other coloured materials are let into 
hollows : the first is the usual process, the others are less common. 
Coloured enamels are sometimes, but seldom used as well as stones. 
The variety of this style which we find in the valley of the Kuban 
is more sober and more classical, and not so closely connected with 
the animal style. In the valley of the Don, and in western Siberia, 
the objects are more gaily coloured and more barbaric : the poly- 
chrome style takes possession of the animal style and unites with it. 

There is every reason to suppose that most of this polychrome 
jewellery was manufactured, for export, in the workshops of various 
Bosphoran cities. The Bosphoran artists adopted the Oriental fashion, 
and used it to decorate the particular articles which their barbarian 
customers required : pieces of armour and of horse trappings ; glass 
and metal vases ; personal ornaments, such as crowns, tores, necklaces, 
bracelets, metal-plated belts, fibulae and brooches, garment plaques, 
and the like. In the Greek towns themselves the new fashion was 
slow in establishing itself, and the objects in the polychrome style 
are almost exclusively imports, probably from Greece, Asia Minor 
and Syria, where the same period saw a great revival, under Persian 
and Egyptian influence, of the polychrome style in jewellery , In these 
imports, the principle of the polycnromy , the technique and the whole 
spirit are not the same as in the articles manufactured by Bosphoran 
artists for Sarmatian customers : the Greco-Oriental branch is more 
refined and more moderate, it makes more use of enamel, less 
of coloured stones. But from the end of the first century a. d., 


certain objects, hitherto peculiar to the Sarmatians, come into use 
among the Greek inhabitants of the Bosphoran cities : and these are 
ornamented in the characteristic Sarmatian manner. Arms in the 
first place: also fibulae. Until the first century B.C., fibulae were 
virtually unknown to the Iranians of the Russian steppes and to the 
inhabitants of the Greek cities : they now become more and more 
common : tendril fibulae, round and oval fibulae, animal-shaped 
fibulae, and so forth. From the very beginning they are decorated 
in the polychrome style. In the second and third centuries A. D., the 
adoption of Sarmatian customs and of the Sarmatian style becomes 
more and more pronounced. Thenceforward it is not only in Sarma- 
tian country, in the steppes of Europe and Asia, that the objects in the 
polychrome style prevail : they appear, in steadily increasing numbers, 
in the Greek cities as well. 

I have already mentioned, in the preceding chapter, the most inter- 
esting of the second- and third -century finds at Panticapaeum, which 
bear witness to the change of taste and habits. We saw tliat the tomb 
of Rhescuporis II belonged at latest to the year 229. A recent find, 
which has been acquired by the Louvre, and which I hope to publish 
before long, contains imprints from coins of the Emperor Pupienus 
(a. d. 238), and consequently belongs to the last decades of the first 
half of the third century. It has become customary, in archaeological 
works, to consider that coins comprised in a find possess no more 
than a relative value for the purpose of dating the tomb. But the 
special circumstances of each case must be taken into account. When 
discussing the tomb of Rhescuporis II, I showed that the chronological 

evidence afforded by the coin imprints was perfectly accurate. So in 
the Louvre find : I cannot think that if the tomb were much later 
than the single year of Pupienus' reign, it would have contained 
imprints of his coins, which cannot have had a wide or a prolonged 
circulation. Now the Louvre find presents the same peculiarities as 
those which are dated by the reign of Rhescuporis II : the same 
arms, the same clasps, the same system of polychrome decora- 
tion. It is worth noticing that it includes a golden fibula of the same 
shape as the fibulae found in the region of the Kuban, a fibula with 
flat back and tendril foot. Throughout the third century, that is to 
say, the period immediately preceding the arrival of the Goths, we have 
an almost continuous series of similar finds. The most characteristic 
are those of 1874, published in the Compte Rendu for 1874, pp. x-xi, 
and 1875, p. 26. One of these is dated by imprints from coins of the 
Emperor Gordian (a. d. 238-44) and undoubtedly belongs to his 
time ; two others by coins of Maximian (275-307) and of his content- 


porary, the Bosphoran lung Thothorses (278/9-308/9). The two 
latter are particularly distinctive. The second includes an iron sword 
of purely Bosphoran type, silver clasps, and beads and garment plaques 
like those from the tomb of Rhescuporis II. A great number of 
similar plaques were found in the tomb dated by the coins of Gordian. 
It is clear, therefore, that down to the end of the third century and 
the beginning of the fourth, the civilization of the Bosphorus retained 
that purely Sarmatian character which it had assumed in the second 
century a.d. In the third century, just as in the time of Rhescuporis 1 1 , 
the majority of the objects from Panticapaean tombs are exactly similar 
to those from Sarmatian tombs, of the first and second centuries a.d,, 
on the Kuban. 

This continuous series leads ■ directly to the fourth-century finds 
at Panticapaeum, which are no less numerous. The richest and most 
important are the contents, now in the Hermitage, of two tombs 
which were pillaged about 1904, They can be accurately dated by 
two dishes, one from each tomb, which were gifts from the Emperor 
Constantius II (337-61), to the persons buried in the tombs ; also 
by imprints from coins of Valentinian I (364-75) or Valentinian II 
(375-93), of Sauromates II (174-210) and of Gordian (238-44). 
As the finds probably belonged to a number of consecutive burials, 
a frequent practice at the time, I have no hesitation in assigning part 
of the objects to the third, and part to the second half of the fourth 
century a, d. Now, in the nature of the tomb furniture, these finds 
do not differ from third-century finds. There are the same funerary 
crowns, with gold medallions taken from Roman and Bosphoran 
coins ; the same solid gold tores, terminating in heads of fantastic 
animals, eared and fanged, with a long squarish snout ; the same 
custom of burying horse trappings with the dead ; and so forth. But 
there are novelties both in the character and in the decoration of the 
objects. The shapes of the arms, especially of the swords, are new : new 
arms are introduced, such as the shield with eg^-shaped boss. The 
fibulae are more numerous, larger, more massive and more com- 

Elicated : the types remain the same, but the forms are exaggerated, 
•astly, in the system of decoration, the predominant process is the 
diversification of the surface by means of garnets cut to geometric 
shapes and surrounded by golden cloisons : although the older 
practice is by no means abandoned, that of stones inlaid in hollows 
and surrounded by a wire in pseudo-granulation. It cannot be 
doubted that a new wave has spread over the almost wholly Sarmatian 
culture of Panticapaeum. This was unquestionably the Germanic, 
the Gothic wave. What did it bring with it ? 



The introduction of the new arms, and the modification of the 
old, were certainly due to the military and conquering spirit of the 
new-comers. I will not deny that they brought with them the new 
variety or varieties of fibula, which they had developed elsewhere, 
out of the same type, however, as was current at Panticapaeum, the 
tendril fibula. Nevertheless these new forms of fibula were now 
deeply influenced by Panticapaean art. I would instance the intro- 
duction of the animal style into the ornamentation— the use of bird's 
heads, the lion fibula from Szilagy-Somlyd, and so forth — ; and the 
constant occurrence of fibulae in the shape of animals, such as were 
widespread in the Bosphorus from the first to the third centuries a,d. 
But I see no novelty in the technical processes of the jewellery, or in 
the decorative system. The Goths adopted all the processes which 
were employed in the Bosphorus before their arrival : embossing, false 
filigree, cloisonne. They also appropriated the polychrome style of 
decoration with all its rules. Their predilection for the garnet is 
nothing new. Before their time, the garnet was the most popular of 
precious stones with the Sarmatians, no doubt because it was the 
cheapest and the easiest to work. Lastly, the development of cloisonne 
combined with cut garnets was merely the natural outcome of prin- 
ciples which had been observed in the Bosphorus long before the 
arrival of the Goths : witness the Maikop belt. It must also be noted, 
that the fourth-century style of jewellery at Panticapaeum was not 
greatly affected by the animal style : we said the same about the 
western branch of the polychrome style as a whole, the branch of 
the Kuban valley and the Bosphoran kingdom. 

The fourth -century finds just mentioned are by no means isolated. 
Wc have several of them, and some later ones as well. They 
are not confined to Kerch ; like the Sarmatian art of the previous 
age, they are spread all over the Russian steppes. I may cite 
the finds, published by Tolst6y and Kondakov in the Antiquities 
of South Russia, from Chulek near Taganrog in the region of 
the Don, from Kudinetov in the Tersk province in Northern 
Caucasus, the great fibula from Nezhin in the district of Chernigov ; 
and the excavations, unknown to these writers, in the cemetery of 
Suuk Su near Gurzuf in the southern Crimea. The Gotho-Sarma- 
tian civilization, therefore, developed uninterruptedly in South Russia 
and covered the same area as the Sarmatian. Every one knows that 
it did not stop at the frontiers of modern Russia. It spread, through 
the region of the Danube, all over the western Roman provinces and 
even over Italy itself. Products of this distinctive art, which was very 
closely connected with the Gotho-Sarmatian, are found on the Rhine, 
2333 Bb 


in Merovingian France, in the English county of Kent, in Spain, and 
in North Africa. The carriers of the art were certainly not the Goths 
alone, who in so short a space of time cannot have formed a class of 
craftsmen familiar with all the technical details of this complicated 
kind of jewellery, but more than any one else, the Hellenized Sarma- 
tians or Sarmatized Greeks who took an active share in the expeditions 
of the Goths. This is the reason why the spread of the new style was 
not only not checked, but even assisted by trie conquests of the Huns : 
it is well known that the Huns, like the Goths, were accompanied by 
Sarmatian tribes. 

I cannot give a list here of all the finds which illustrate the develop- 
ment of this style in the various quarters into which the Goths and 
the Sarmatians introduced it ; I should like, however, to mention 
one or two, to show the stability of type in the objects which we have 
proved to be wholly and exclusively Sarmatian. 

A special position is occupied by the celebrated find at Petrossa 
or Petroasa in Rumania, to which I have made several allusions 
already, and which has been sumptuously published by Odobesco. 
I cannot deal with it in detail : but I would draw attention to certain 
important points. It is remarkable that the Petroasa treasure contains 
a number of objects which strangely recall the Siberian finds and the 
treasure of Novocherkarsk, that is to say, the northern branch of the 
polychrome style. I have already mentioned the gold patera, which 
reminded us, by its semi-classical form and figures, of the silver 
phalarae from Sarmatian South Russia. I would lay special stress on 
the tendency, in both groups, to give the gods of the native Pantheon 
a classical guise. This tendency is observable in South Russia from 
the fourth century B.C. It never leads, however, as in the Roman 
provinces, to the substitution of a classical for the native deity. The 
native deity preserves his attributes and his individuality. I would also 
point to the similarities in technique, and in the forms of the animals. 

Let me also draw attention to the two openwork paterae, with 
handles in the shape of panthers, covered with precious stones ; and 
to the fibulae in the form of eagles studded with gems. These objects 
are in the same style as the best things from Siberia, and their Oriental 
character cannot be denied. One would like to assign them a fairly 
early date. Whatever its date may be, it is certain that the treasure 
of Petroasa is closely connected with the finds from Siberia and from 
the region of the Don. I do not know whether we can ascribe it to 
the Goths. The runes on the tore may be later than the objects 
themselves, and the whole find may have been seized by the Goths 
from some Sarmatian or Thracian prince. 


The new find at Siebenbrunnen in Austria is of a different 
nature. Kubitschek, who published it, recognized the close affinity 
between the Austrian graves and the tombs, already mentioned, 
of the family of Rhescuporis II. Astonished at this affinity, and 
convinced that the Siebenbmnnen things were Gothic, he wished 
to assign the Kerch finds to a post- Gothic date ; this we have 
shown to be quite impossible. The affinity is even closer than Kubit- 
schek supposed. The little gold garment plaques from the Austrian 
find are of exactly the same shapes as the Sarmatian plaques from 
tombs on the Kuban, at Kerch, on the Don, and on the Dnieper 
(see fig. 17). It is not surprising that they occur in the Danube 
region as well. The gold bracelets terminate in the same heads as 
the tores from Orenburg, from Stavropol, from the regions of the 
Kuban and of Kerch. The mirrors are closely connected with 
the mirrors of the Kuban. I do not wish to discuss the date of the 
Siebenbrunnen find. But whether it dates from the fourth or from 
the fifth century, it is nearly allied to the finds of pre- Gothic South 
Russia. I do not see why the Siebenbrunnen graves should not have 
belonged to a Sarmatian woman and child. 

Kubitschek himself noticed the kinship between the Siebenbrunnen 
find and a find made at Valmeray in the commune of Moult in Calva- 
dos (Normandy). The tomb was that of a young girl ; it contained, 
besides a fibula decorated with inset stones, * one hundred and sixty 
small gold fragments, weighing 37 grammes in all, consisting of 
linear borders forming a succession of triangles, of solid triangles with 
little balls at the angles, of rectangles ornamented with three raised 
lines of six dots each, of circles with a ball in the centre, and lastly of 
double, conjoined triangles, like the solid triangles already mentioned, 
but set with small garnets * (E. de Robillard de Beaurepaire, Bulletin 
de la Sociiti d'Antiqumres de France , viii (1878), p. 155). These 
plaques, like the plaques from Siebenbrunnen and from South Russia, 
were undoubtedly sewn on to garments. The Norman plaques, then, 
offer a striking resemblance to the South Russian finds mentioned 
above (see fig. 17). 

Others have been found at Nordendorf in Germany, according to 
Brenner, whose references I have been unable to verify ; and in 
North Africa, in a Carthaginian tomb of the Vandal period which 
I hope to publish before long. The plaques from Carthage have the 
same shapes as the Sarmatian plaques, but their purpose was perhaps 
different : they may have formed a necklace. 

Half-way between these finds, which go with the Bosphoran, and 
the treasure of Petroasa, stands the celebrated find of Szilagy-Somlyd, 


published by Pulszky and Hampel, which undoubtedly belongs to the 
same period as the Kerch finds of 1904, the period of Yalens, Valen- 
tin ian and Gratian. Let us look at the fibulae. One class of fibula 
is enriched with cabochons, which are set in cavities surrounded 
by granulation or false filigree, and is ornamented with granulated 
geometric patterns — double spirals spectacle-shaped, eight-shaped, or 
triangular : the whole decoration, therefore, is of the same type as in 
the Sarmatian polychrome objects. In another class of fibula, the 
granulated ornaments are partly replaced by, partly combined with, 
the embossed work which is frequent on the Kuban. It is with this 
class that we must connect the large fibula in the form of an oval 
brooch : a common shape on the Kuban . A third class finds remark- 
able analogies among tne Sarmatian objects from the Don and the 
Dnieper, and in the treasure of Petroasa : the most characteristic 
specimen is a fibula with the body in the form of a couchant lion, 
geometrically stylized, and embellished with precious stones. The 
figure of the lion is strangely reminiscent of the Scythian animal style 
pure and simple, modified to suit the fashion of polychrome decoration. 
The tail of the fibula is adorned with an embossed griffin. Curiously 
enough, the incisions on the lion's body are extraordinarily like the 
incisions in the field of the plaque from Siverskaya Stanitsa. Still 
closer to the Sarmatian plaques or phalarae, with their vegetable, 
animal and mythological decoration, are the boss-shaped fibulae : 
the boss is decorated with two embossed friezes of animals : the 
work, though barbarous, is exceedingly like that of the South Russian 

Before leaving Szilagy-Somlyd, let me point out another queer 
coincidence. The gold vases of Szilagy-Somlyd have triangular 
plaques, studded with gems, attached to their mouths. This strange 
system of decoration can be explained with the help of Scythian 
monuments : the rhyta, of horn or wood, from the kurgans of the 
Seven Brothers, the wooden vases from Solokha and from other tombs 
of the same group. In these objects, the golden triangles fastened 
to the mouth have a technical justification : in the Szilagy-Somlyo 
vases, they are decorative survivals and nothing more. I have no 
doubt that the Szilagy-Somlyo vases, which are very primitive, were 
imitated from wooden originals. It is not surprising that the orna- 
mentation in triangles reappears on the well-known drinking-horn 
from Taplow Barrow in Buckinghamshire, now in the British Museum, 
a work of the Anglo-Saxon period. 

It would be easy, if space permitted, to multiply these comparisons 
between Sarmatian art and the art of the Merovingian epoch. To 


conclude my study of the polychrome style, I should like to draw atten- 
tion to a matter which has hitherto, I fancy, escaped notice. We have 
followed the development of the round or oval brooch in Sarmatian 
art (figs. 1 6 and 19) : the characteristicfeatureof the decoration appeared 
to be the combination of the simplest geometric motives — circle, 
spectacle-shaped spiral, double spiral in the form of an eight — carried 
out in granulation or in filigree, with a rich polychromy effected by the 
use of precious stones, transparent or coloured glass, and enamels. 
Embossing is sometimes employed for the ornaments instead of granu- 
lation. Very few specimens of these brooches have been found in 
the Roman provinces, and such as have been found are comparatively 
late. The British Museum, for example, has only two (Marshall, 
Nos. 2863 and 2864, pi. LXV) : they came from Antarados in Syria, 
and belong to the third or fourth century A. D. We have seen that 
these brooches are common on the Kuban, where the earliest go back 
to the second or first century b. a, the date of the finds at Artyukhov's 
farm, at Akhtanizovka, at Siverskaya, at Zubov's farm. Now just 
at the period of the migrations these brooches become common in 
Western Europe : we find them in Italy, in France, on the Rhine, 
and in Anglo-Saxon England. In England they are confined to 
Kent, where they exhibit an interesting and original development, 
and are characteristic of the rich civilization which flourished there 
from the fourth to the sixth century. Compare the South Russian 
brooches which I have reproduced with the selection given by 
Baldwin Brown (The Arts in Early England, iv, pis. CXLV-CXLVII) : 
particularly the Frankish fibula in the museum at Rouen (pi. CXLVII, 
2) ; the fibula from Kent, formerly in the Mayer Collection and now 
in the Liverpool Museum (pi. CXLVII, r) ; or the Maidstone and 
Dover fibulae (pi. CXLVI, 1-2) : ornament and technique are the 
same as in South Russia. Another testimony to the persistence of the 
types created or adopted by the Sarmatians, and to the wide diffusion 
of these types at the period of the migration of the Sarmatian tribes. 

The conclusion which follows from these facts and these com- 
parisons is one which must be taken into account in all future investi- 
gation. The polychrome style which spread over Central Europe at 
the period of the migrations is totally different from the polychrome 
style which was current in the Roman provinces and in Italy during 
the first and second centuries a.j>. The provincial and Italian style 
has nothing to do with South Russia : it is the outcome of the Syrian 
polychrome style on the one hand, and of the ancient Celtic poly- 
chrome style on the other. The Syrian style aims at providing a 
handsome gold setting for one or more precious stones, the Celtic at 


ornamenting objects, chiefly bronze objects, by means of coloured 
enamels in champleve. This brief characterization must suffice : 
but I would gladly be corrected, if my definitions of the Syrian and 
Gaulish styles are beside the mark. 

The aim and the character of the North Iranian polychrome style, 
as I have already noticed, are quite different. The problem which it 
sets itself is a more difficult one : it endeavours to transform the 
gold or silver surface into a field for colouristic display, for a symphony 
of sheer colour : the ground itself serves merely as a foil for the stone, 
providing a shining monochrome frame to intensify the play of tints. 
Accordingly the technical processes which this style prefers are the 
insertion of gems or cut stones into cavities surrounded by filigree ; 
the arrangement of cut stones and gems, by means of cloisons, in 
geometric patterns ; and the instalment of cut stones and pastes in 
openwork frames of gold. 

This style, which originated in the East, and was highly elaborated 
in Iranian art, established itself in the steppes of South Russia and 
Siberia during the Hellenistic period : here it underwent considerable 
modification at the hands of Greco-Iranian artists, and when the 
Goths came, it was adapted by the Sarmatians to the objects which 
the Goths introduced into South Russia from their northern home, 

Down to this period, the Iranian polychrome style, developed by 
Sarmatians and Greeks in South Russia, was virtually confined to 
the Russian steppes, A few specimens were brought by the Sarma- 
tians to the Danubian provinces. But when the Goths, with Sarma- 
tians and Greco- Sarmatians in their train, poured into Central Europe, 
and spread thence to Southern Europe and Northern Africa, they 
took with them the Sarmatian art which served to decorate their arms, 
their fibulae, their garments, their vases : the shapes of these objects 
remaining, partially at least, Germanic. Since the use of the Syrian 
and Celtic polychrome styles was already widespread in Central 
Europe ; since, under the influence of imports from the Syrian East, 
the artistic taste of the population was turning more and more towards 
polychromy ; and since Europe was being gradually transformed into 
a group of states in which the dominant classes were Germanic : it is 
not to be wondered at, that the whole of Central and Southern Europe 
now adopted the I rano- Sarmatian polychrome style, and substituted 
it for, or combined it with the Syrian and Celtic styles, which were 
much poorer, and over refined for the taste of the conquerors of 
Europe. Naturally enough, in each of the new European and 
African states, the style was modified and associated with the local 
art : varieties of the polychrome style thus arose, the Lombard, the 


Vandal, the Spanish, the Frankish or Merovingian, the Anglo-Saxon* 
But the source of the style should not be forgotten : nor need it 
astonish us, that the style continued to flourish in its original homes, 
in Sassanid Persia, and in South Russia ; and there, perhaps, with 
greater splendour than anywhere else. 

One more remark, to finish our sketch of the polychrome style. 
It was not through conquest only that the style was propagated. It 
was mainly through commercial intercourse that the polychrome 
style penetrated to northern Europe, especially central, eastern and 
northern Russia and the Finnish and Germanic north ; above all, 
through the constant communication between southern and central 
Russia, along the great Russian rivers ; and between the Germanic 
tribes settled in Russia, and those which had remained in the north. 
Thus the northern branch of the polychrome style arose. It differs 
from the central and southern European branch in being an offshoot 
of the northern branch of the Sarmatian style, the branch which 
preserved a close connexion with the animal style. 

Let us now turn to the animal style. Its history is much more 
difficult and complicated. I have spoken of the animal style several 
times in the course of this work : but I must recapitulate the principal 
features of its evolution, to make its development in South Russia 
clear, and to indicate the channels by which it made its way into 
western Europe. Unfortunately no one has ever examined the general 
evolution of the animal style, from the artistic and historical point of 
view r . Special aspects have been dealt with, but no comprehensive 
study exists. Yet I am convinced that without such a study it is 
impossible to elucidate the many complex problems which are 
presented by the animal style of the Middle Ages. 

What is the origin of the animal style ? Which came first in order 
of time, the animal style or the geometric ? I do not know that a 
definite answer can be given. I do not believe that the evolution 
proceeded on the same lines everywhere, or that everywhere, as at 
Susa, the animal style preceded the geometric and enriched it with 
new motives. Without committing ourselves to ill-founded theories, 
we may affirm that the animal style is very ancient. I will not speak 
of the palaeolithic period : but as early as the neolithic period, it 
plays, in some regions, a predominant part in the ornamentation of 
clay vases and other objects. The classic example is the neolithic 
pottery of Susa* 

In the Copper Age, as we have seen, the place of the animal style 
in decorative art was an exceedingly important one. We find the 
animal style at every turn, especially in carved and engraved objects 


of metal, bone, or stone. The system of decoration is very primitive, 
and recalls the palaeolithic system. The surface of the object is 
covered with naturalistic figures of animals, sometimes broadcast, 
sometimes arranged in horizontal or vertical rows. 

In Mesopotamia, a number of radical innovations were made, 
which introduced certain new principles of decoration. These 
principles were of the highest importance, and have remained classic 
down to our own time. Side by side with the arrangement of animals 
in series, and with their haphazard distribution over the surface, the 
Sumerian Age in Mesopotamia employed all the schemes which 
afterwards became normal in the animal style generally. The 
heraldic combinations of two or three animals ; of two animals and 
an inanimate object ; of two animals and a human figure ; or of two 
human figures and an animal. The combination of two or three 
animals in a close-knit group, where one of the animals may be 
replaced by a human figure : the favourite scheme being that of a 
fight between two animals, or between a human or divine being, male 
or female, and one or two animals. The contortion of an animal figure 
to suit a given space : — crouching animal with head reverted ; coucnant 
animals forming a frieze or even a circle, a motive taken from the 
cat tribe, A continuous succession of animal figures, so that the space 
is filled with a close network of animals, one attached to the other, 
the hunting motive being the commonest. Lastly, the termination 
of objects by figures of animals or animal heads. 

Each of these schemes might be illustrated by a number of 
examples from the Sumerian period : 1 shall not linger over the 
matter, but merely refer the reader to Heuzey's great works, and to 
the excellent analysis recently published by Professor Ludwig Curtius. 

These schemes of naturalistic animals were accompanied by 
another very important innovation : the introduction into decorative 
and symbolic art of special symbolic and fantastic creations formed 
by the amalgamation o f fav ouri te an imajs of the period with each 
other and sometimes withliuman beings~T lions, eagles, snakes, bulls, 
perhaps sheep and goats ; mostly winged. It was thus that the 
popular" types of fantastic animals with a religious significance arose : 
the two types of griffin — with a horned lion's head, and with an eared 
eagle's head, both crested ; the two types of dragon— with a snake *s 
or a crocodile's head, horned or not ; the well-known type of the 
sphinx. AH these types spread far and wide, eastward, westward 
and northward. I cannot dwell upon this subject either. I must 
point out, however, that the Sumerian innovations exercised a power- 
ful influence upon the entire ancient world. This influence can be 


observed everywhere, in Eg y p t, in Hittite Asia Minor , in Babyjonk 
and Assyria, in the_Ae gean and Mycenaean world, in Cyprusand in 
Phoenicia, i n "Thrygia, Lydia, Tapij ad^iL JPaphlag orua, Lycia, in 
Etruria ajj3jJTJjar dinia, and finally in continental, island and colonial 
Gr eece. 

Tn~Greece, the style flourished during the archaic period, but 
gradually gave way to other decorative conceptions, richer and more 
subtle. It persisted, however, in the East. In Assyria, above all, 
it underwent a remarkable development. Assyria, and the countries 
dependent on Assyria, retained all the schemes mentioned above, 
but introduced a number of rather important alterations. The 
animal ornamentation becomes more and more purely decorative : 
the animal figure loses all reality, and comes to be used as a mere 
ornamental motive, like vegetable and geometric motives. On 
Assyro-Persian sword -hilts in the Louvre, and from Carchemtsh in 
the Ashmolean, the very ancient scheme of a lion devouring a goat 
is reduced to a Hon attacking the head of a goat : the next stage is 
the gradual transformation of both lion and goat's head into a collection 
of lines, and the fantastic combination of them with floral ornament. 
This is but one example ; many could be given. 

The Iranian world was strongly influenced by Assyria and its 
civilization, especially in the first millennium B.C. But at the same 
time it certainly had a civilization of its own, and a comparatively 
independent art. The Iranian world probably created the animal style 
usually called Scythian. I shall examine this style in some detail, for 
the animal style nowhere attained so high a development as in South 
Russia during the period of Scythian ascendancy. All the varieties 
of the Oriental animal style are represented, the most archaic as well 
as the most elaborate. From the sixth century B.C. onwards, we find 
objects strewn all over with figures of animals, such as the axe from 
Kelermes (pi. VIII, 1), the stag from Kul-Oba, the fish of Vettersfelde : 
objects decorated with groups of fighting animals ; heraldic combina- 
tions ; animals and groups of animals forming a dense network which 
covers the whole surface of the object, as in the phiale from Solokha 
(pi. XX, 3) ; and so forth. Several of these motives were borrowed 
directly from Oriental art, others were transformed by Ionian artists 
and reached South Russia in a modified, Ionian form. By the 
sixth century, three main currents are observable in the animal style 
of South Russia : an Assyro-Persian current, an Ionian current, and 
a current which may be called Scythian. These currents influenced 
each other and gave rise to hybrid forms. 

The purely Scythian variety, the only one which is used to decorate 
*3S3 c c 



horse trappings, though affected by the two others, preserves a pro- 
nounced individuality and is always readily distinguishable. The 
animal style was never so purely ornamental as in the variety which 
established itself in South Russia at the Scythian epoch. It would 
be an embarrassing task to catalogue all the features of this style and 

FfG. 21. 

to classify all its variants. We notice, first of all, that the general 
tendency is the same as in the classical East. The animal figure is 
subordinated to its ornamental purpose : hence it is often treated 
arbitrarily and fancifully. The attitudes are sometimes wholly 
unnatural: The common Eastern motive of the animal with reverted 
head is frequently exaggerated ; the hindquarters being turned in 
the opposite direction to the forepart (fig, 21, F, h). A round space 


is decorated with a circle of lions or other felines : a common modifi- 
cation is to make the animal bite its own tail (fig. 21, c). Sometimes 
two animals biting each other's tail are grouped together (fig. 21 » B). 
The artist is quite ready to cut the animal into pieces and to use the 
head, or even the flanks, foreleg, or hindleg as a separate motive. 
The favourite heads are heads of birds of prey (figs. 2 1 , E and 22, b), lions 
(fig. 22, f), elks (fig. 22, A, c), reindeer (fig. 22, h), wild goats (fig. 21 , d), 
lx>ars, wolves (fig. 22^ d). The heads or foreparts are frequently 
grouped in pairs or in triangles, or even form a complete wheel, 
oddly reminiscent of the solar wheel (fig. 21 , d, e). Heads of birds or 
griffins lend themselves particularly well to fantastic combinations. 
Remember the standard from the Kuban, in which the bird's eye 
plays an important part : we find the same procedure in fourth- and 
third-century plaques from the region of the Dnieper (fig. 21, e). 
The lion's head is also in regular use. It goes without saying that the 
bird's heads, griffin's heads, and lion's heads are reduced to their 
essential elements and geometrically stylized. All that remains of 
the bird's head is a beak and huge eye ; of the lion's head, the ears, 
the eyes, and a vestige of the muzzle. 

The horror vacui, it has been said, is strongly pronounced in 
Scythian art. Not more, I should say, than in decorative art else- 
where. What makes our objects look so strange, is that the voids 
are filled almost exclusively with animals or parts of animals. The 
artist likes to give the object the shape of an animal : but he 
does not hesitate to cover this animal with other animals or parts of 

Still more peculiar is the tendency to shape the extremities of 
animals as animals or parts of animals. Look at the lion of Kelermes . 
each paw has the form of a lion with reverted head ; the tail is com- 
posed of a row of such lions (pi . IX, 1). The heads used for this purpose 
are generally bird's heads or griffin's heads. In works decorated in 
the Scythian animal style, the paws, the tail, the ends of the horns, 
the ears, seldom retain their natural form : they are usually trans- 
formed into birds' heads (e. g. fig. 22, c and e). In figures of horned 
beasts, stag, elk, reindeer, wild goat, the propensity nas particularly 
free play. Oxen, we may remark, hardly ever appear, sheep rarely. 
The style looks as if it had been invented by a race of hunters* 

I have already referred to the choice of animals. Side by side with 
the favourite animals of Oriental art as a whole — the cat tribe, espe- 
cially the lion ; and fanciful creatures— we find others which are not 
familiar to Greek or Oriental decorative art : reindeer, elk, wolf and 
horse. The animals of the Ionian animal style appear chiefly on 



objects which show strong Ionian influence or were actually made by 
Ionian artists* 

The motives of the Scythian animal style are sometimes combined 
with floral motives, especially palmettes (fig. 22, a-c). Still more 
interesting, palmettes are occasionally made out of purely animal 
motives. Here is an elk's head, in which the horns, wildly exaggerated, 
form a real palmette (fig, 22, h). Here, a stag at rest, whose horns 

Fig. 22. 

make a sort of floral ornament above its head (fig. 21, o). So in 
fanciful animals also, for example in the griffin, with stag's antlers, 
figured on fig- 2r, H. Sometimes the bodies and heads of heraldic 
animals compose a palmette, a kind of arabesque in which the bodies 
are lost and only the ornament appears (fig. 22, G — -two lions ; 
fig. 22, t — two stags) : at other times the palmette is composed of 
the heads alone, set on excessively long necks (fig. 22, f). 

I cannot enumerate all the variations of the Scythian animal style. 
It would be well if a complete repertory of the motives were compiled. 


They are at present scattered in publications which are not always 
easily procurable. Moreover, the greater part of the objects have 
never been published : the initial task would be to collect and photo- 
graph them. Hundreds of variants would come to light. 

The variety of the animal style which I have briefly described is 
not a product of South Russia. As early as the sixth century B.C. 
we find it fully formed. Historical analysis shows, that apart from 
the pieces which show strong Greek influence* this variety finds 
remarkable analogies in the contemporaneous art of Iranian Asia, 
and is thereby connected with the late Assyrian animal style. But it 
also contains elements which are northern rather than eastern. The 
elk and the reindeer are entirely foreign to Mesopotamian and Persian 
art. The appearance of the northern element has been accounted 
for by supposing that the style arose in western Siberia, in the region 
of Minussinsk. True, that in this region, from the Bronze Age 
onwards, we find a similar style. But first, the Minussinsk style 
shows no signs of evolution : it remains almost stationary, and is 
much poorer in motives than the Scythian animal style. And 
secondly, the Siberian style, though very awkward, clumsy and rude, 
is by no means primitive. It is a decadent and a derivative style. It 
bears marks of Assyrian influence, but this influence was indirect : 
the Assyrian elements reached Siberia through another medium, and 
were distorted before they arrived. 

The only theory, which really accounts for the genesis of the 
Scythian animal style, places its origin in a country which roughly 
corresponds to modern Turkestan, but which also comprises the 
mountain region of Altai, rich in metals, where tombs have been 
discovered which resemble those on the Kuban. It was here that 
an Iranian people, the Sacians, in constant intercourse with Assyria, 
formed the animal style which they afterwards brought with them to 
South Russia, 

The theory of the Central Asiatic origin of the South Russian 
animal style is* not new. But I have found no definite proof of the 
theory in any work on the subject. Such a proof, as far as I can 
judge, is furnished by the following considerations. It is well known 
that the animal style, in conjunction with the geometric, forms the 
basis of the ornamental style of the earlier Chinese art. The early 
system of ornamental art in China is a topic which I cannot discuss 
at length : I have devoted a special article to it : ( South Russia and 
China, two centres of the animal style*. But I should like to lay 
stress upon certain peculiarities of earlier Chinese art which, as far 
as I know, have never been properly emphasized. By earlier Chinese 


art I mean the art of the Chu dynasty (1122-250 b. c.). From the 
mass of archaic Chinese objects, many scholars have tried to separate 
a group of monuments earlier than the Chu dynasty. But there is 
no possibility of dating these objects, as no systematic excavation 
has ever been conducted in China, and the Cmi dynasty is our only 
landmark. This matter, however, is of little importance to us, for 
the system of decoration in the earlier group coincides, in the main 
points, with the system of the. Chu dynasty. 

The chief fact which issues from the study of early Chinese art 
is this. Even in the earlier monuments, we find a definite, well 
characterized system of decoration : a combination of decoration 
in the animal, and in the geometric style. Which is the more ancient 
we do not know. The basis of the decorative system is of course 
the animal style. But the closest study of the monuments fails to 
establish the priority of the one or the other style. All that can be 
proved is that the animal decoration cannot be traced back to the 
geometric. Let me now describe briefly the peculiarities of the 
Chinese animal style. 

( 1) The principle of decoration consists in a combination of motives 
of the animal and of the geometric style, the animal motives forming 
the foundation. The geometric motives — mostly combinations or 
ribbons — serve to connect the animal motives, and assume very 
primitive forms, mostly primitive spiral and maeander patterns. 
The ribbons often end in heads of animals. • 

(2) The scale of the animal motives does not greatly vary. Com- 
plete figures of naturalistic animals are exceptional : half -stylized 
tigers, fishes and perhaps snakes. 

(3) The leading part in the ornamental system is played by 
fantastic, symbolical animals of four types : (a) a griffin with a horned 
lion's head, the head being usually adorned with a crest ; (b) a griffin 
with an eagle*s head, the head being eared and crested ; (c) a dragon 
or snake-griffin, with the head horned, toothed, sometimes eared, 
and sometimes crested ; {d) the same dragon, but hornless. It goes 
without saying that these types were not invented in China. All 
four, as we know, were favourite types in Babylono-Assyrian art, 
which had inherited them from Sumerian art. It is impossible to 
suppose that such peculiar creations were invented independently 
by Surnerians and later by Chinese : for we find very primitive 
forms of these fantastic beings in Sumer, and the lion, for example, 
was quite unknown to Chinese art throughout the period of the 
Chu dynasty. 

(4) Complete figures of animals, whether realistic, like the tiger, 


or fantastic, are rare. The chief basis of Chinese decoration is 
constituted by parts of these animals, especially heads, 

(5) The heads are used both in naturalistic reproduction, giving 
all the details, and in geometric schematizations, where the heads 
are reduced to their most characteristic and most prominent features. 
The head of the lion-griffin appears as a combination of geometrized 
crest, horns, eyebrows, eyes, cars, and muzzle ; the head of the 
eagle-griffin as a combination of beak and eyes, both occasionally 
assuming the form of a primitive spiral ; the tiger-head is reduced 
to the same elements as the iion-griffin*s head, excepting the crest 
and the horns, I need not remind the reader that these peculiarities 
arc the peculiarities of the Scythian animal style as well : compare 
the pole- top from tllski on the Kuban (pi. X, 1). 

(6) Just as in the Scythian animal style, the eyes and beak of an 
eagle-griffin arc very commonly used to replace the extremities of 
parts of an animal body. 

(7) The various bronze vases, which are the most characteristic 
products of Chinese art under the Chu dynasty, very often take the 
shape of the fantastic animals mentioned above, or of a combination 
of such animals. 

I will not support my definition of the main features of Chinese 
art in the Chu dynasty by references to particular monuments. A 
glance at the illustrations in Miinsterberg's history of Chinese art 
will suffice. But I should like to describe one of the most character- 
istic and at the same time one of the richest and most elaborate examples 
of the animal style in China, the beautiful bronze vase in the collection 
of Mrs. E. Meyer at New York, which is at present exhibited on 
loan in the Metropolitan Museum, and which is reproduced, with 
the owner's kind permission, on pi. XXXI, 1. A vase which is almost 
a pendant of Mrs. Meyer's is in a private collection in Japan ; it is 
reproduced, insufficiently, by Miinsterberg in his Geschickte der 
Cmnesischm Kimst, ii. 132, fig, 204. 

The vase takes the form of six combined foreparts of fantastic 
animals. The upper part of the front of the vase consists of the head 
and neck of a lion-griffin with sheep's horns ; the lower part, of the 
head, crest and forelegs of an eagle-griffin, the head being reduced 
to the beak, the big eyes, which arc shaped like spirals, the ears and 
the crest. The legs are those of an eagle and cover the forelegs of 
the vase. The surface of the vase is covered on both sides with three 
figures of dragons, the bodies of which are shaped like broad ribbons 
and form primitive rnaeanders. Under the back of the eagle-griffin 
we notice the wing and leg of an eagle-griffin. The cover of the vase, 


that is, the back of the horned lion-griffin, is adorned with realistic 
figures of beasts — two tigers turned to the left, with reverted heads* 
two fishes and two snakes (?). The back of the vase and the handle 
each consist of two superposed foreparts of fantastic animals. The 
back shows two superposed heads : the head of a lion-griffin with 
horns in the form of two fishes, heraldicaHy arranged ; and another, 
more geometrical head of the same, with enormous eyes, ears and 
horns. The hindlegs of the vase have the form of two geometrized 
human figures. The handle consists of a tiger's head issuing from 
the mouth of the lion-griffin's head which constitutes the upper part 
of the back of the vase : the mouth of this tiger's head holds the 
lower part of the handle — the forepart of a dragon with two legs in 
the form of human legs with two large eyes. The whole surface of 
the vase is covered with a net of minute geometric ornaments in the 
form of spirals and maeanders. 

The vase is truly a strange combination , a rich symphony of motives 
of the animal style. But to us, who have studied the Scythian animal 
style, there is nothing in it unfamiliar. Objects in the form of beasts* 
heads are common in Scythia : common also the geometrization of 
the heads, the tendency to cover the surface of the objects with 
figures of other animals, the predilection for the symbolic animals 
of the Assyro-Baby Ionian repertory, the idea of giving the parts of 
an animal the form of other animals (compare the fishes on our vase 
with the fishes which make the wings of the fantastic creatures on 
the scabbards from Kelermes and Melgunov's barrow, pi. VIII, 2), 
the use of parts of the body for separate ornaments (the wings on the 
Maikop belt, pi, XXV, 1 ; compare the Chinese vase, of the same 
type and time as Mrs. Meyer's, in a Japanese collection, Miinsterberg, 
ii, p. 132, fig. 203) ; and so forth. 

I would draw attention to one more feature of the Chinese animal 
style, not represented in the New York vase, but common both on 
Chinese vases of the Chu dynasty and in the Scythian animal style, 
I refer to the combination of floral and animal motives, that is, the 
treatment of the extremities of animal and parts of animals as quasi- 
floral patterns, often combined with eagles beaks and eyes. 

These striking coincidences between the Scythian and the Chinese 
animal style cannot be accidental. The fact that motives borrowed 
from Assyro-Babylonian art are paramount in both speaks for itself. 
I have not the slightest doubt that both countries received the animal 
style from a common source : I mean Iranian Central Asia. The 
Chinese adopted the elements of this style, dealt with them freely, 
in accordance with their artistic temperament, and formed a new 


and peculiar decorative style : the Scythians developed their style 
in close connexion with Persian and Greek art- This explains why 
the two styles, in their final shape, are utterly different. But their 
common origin is evident. We shall see later a repetition of the 
phenomenon in the China of the Hellenistic epoch — the period of the 
Han dynasty. 

The Scythian animal style endured for centuries in South Russia. 
It came under various influences, especially Greek influence; and 
developed in several directions of its own accord. There were two 
branches of the style in South Russia. One, the eastern, clung to 
the old traditions and produced interesting developments of them* 
This branch probably maintained regular relations with Central Asia, 
the original home or the Scythian animal style. This is shown by 
recent finds on the Kuban, those of the f Seven Brothers ' and of 
the barrows at EHsave"tinskaya, which belong to the fifth or fourth 
century B.C. It was this branch which devised the ingenious motives 
of the horns and the animal palmettes, and which adapted the heraldic 
pair of animals for the purpose of ornament. Nothing of the sort 
is to be found in the western portion of the Scythian state, on the 
Dnieper and the Bug, during the period of its prime, the fourth and 
third centuries B.C. In western Scythia the animal style was by 
this time moribund : proof meets us at every turn : there are no 
new forms, no token of creative power, nothing but dry repetitions 
of ancient designs. Take for example the gold-plated sword-sheath 
from Solokha. The native artist has chosen the ancient motive of 
the lion devouring the deer, in its Ionian form. But see how he has 
treated it : the lion has become a mere conglomeration of strokes, 
without modelling and without plastic value ; the deer, like the earlier 
deer in Persian art, is reduced to a schematic head. The decadence 
is complete. And so in thousands of other objects. 

The Sarmatians, who succeeded the Scythians, adopted and culti- 
vated the animal style. It is hard to say whether they borrowed it 
from their predecessors or not. On the one hand, the Sarmatian 
style shows a fondness for motives which are by no means favourites 
in the true Scythian animal style, the style which was uninfluenced 
by Ionian art. The Sarmatian repertory consists chiefly of fights 
between animals, and of separate animals, naturalistically rendered, 
arranged in rows and sometimes grouped with human beings. There 
is also a tendency, in the Siberian examples, to place the animals and 
men in a landscape setting, a tendency foreign to the Scythian style, 
which is essentially ornamental. The inference is that the Sarmatians 
brought with them a stock of animal motives which differed from the 
»3« *»<1 


Scythian stock, and which had been constituted under the influence 
of a Hellenized Oriental art. The nearest analogy is the art of Parthia 
and Sassanid Persia. 

On the other hand, it is probable that the development of the 
Sarmatian animal style was strongly influenced by Scythian art : 
For the Sarmatians took over most of the peculiarities of the Scythian 
style, and adapted them to their own cherished and traditional motives. 
In the Sarmatian style, as in the Scythian, we find animal extremities 
formed as heads or figures of animals ; horns converted into ornament ; 
contorted animals ; and so forth ; in the Siberian group, a predilection 
also for northern fauna. 

All these considerations lead me to suppose, that the Sarmatian 
animal style originated in a stock of motives brought by the Sarma- 
tians from their old home ; and that the style developed under the 
influence of the Scythian animal style, in particular of its northern 
and eastern branch, the branch which we know from the monuments 
of the Kuban on the one hand, and those of Minussinsk and the Altai 
mountains on the other, 

A distinguishing feature of the Sarmatian animal style is its 
polychromy. The Scythian animal style is almost entirely mono- 
chrome. We have already spoken of Sarmatian polychromy, and 
need not discuss it here. It is possible that polychromy formed an 
integral part of the Sarmatian animal style from the outset. 

We noticed above that there were two branches of Sarmatian 
jewellery : the southern, on the Kuban and in the state of the Bos- 
phorus ; and the northern, on the Don and in Siberia. It was the 
northern branch which cultivated the animal style, of which there 
are only vestiges in the southern branch. These vestiges it carried 
with it into western Europe, in particular the use of birds* heads for 
ornament. Birds* heads, as we know, played an important part in 
the so-called Merovingian and Gothic style of jewellery. The Scytho- 
Sarmatian animal style left a few other traces in the * Gothic * jewellery 
of the West. For example, the combinations of birds' heads, the 
friezes of crouching animals, and the like. More significant, but more 
difficult to determine, is the influence of the northern branch of 
Scytho-Sarmatian jewellery, the branch which preserved its love for 
the animal style, 

I spoke of the northern branch in my sixth chapter. I showed 
that there was a powerful revival of this style on the Kuban, and to 
some extent in Siberia. In its finest products, such as the Maikop 
belt or some of the plaques from Siberia, it reached a very high 
artistic level. Some of the Siberian plaques exhibit a tendency 



First Millennium tt.c. Collection of Mrs. E. Meyer, New York 

{CofiyrtgM Mrs, E, Mtyer, AW York) 


towards a naturalism and an ethnographic realism which are different 
from the naturalism and realism 01 Roman art. The same quality is 
observable on silver phalarae from the South Russian steppes. But 
it was not this tendency which carried the day. The old ornamen- 
talism asserted itself once again, and the majority of the Siberian 
plaaues show as great a fondness for purely ornamental composition 
as tne creations of the Scythian animal style on the Kuban, We find 
the same contracted attitudes in the animals, the same decoration of 
the animal's body by means of other animals, the same animal styliza- 
tion of the extremities, the same ornamental exaggeration of the horns. 
All these peculiarities occur together in the figure of an elk found at 
Verkhneudinsk (Minns, p, 375, %. 192). The body of the elk is 
surcharged with a figure of a grifhn and with the head of an eagle 
devouring a ram's head : the end of the tail is shaped as an eagle's 
head : the antlers form a kind of nimbus, and each tine terminates 
in the head of an eagle or a grifhn. 

It is clear, then, that the eastern and northern branch of the 
Sarmatian animal style had a career of great brilliance and intensity. 
Like the southern branch, it doubtless exercised a powerful influence 
on its neighbours. Its influence, however, did not spread westwards, 
but mainly to east and north. The Chinese world was deeply affected 
by it. The most characteristic features of Chinese life, especially 
Chinese military life, in the Han dynasty (206 b. c-220 a. d.) cannot 
be explained without assuming profound Iranian influence. It is 
to the credit of B. Laufer that he was the first to lay the proper stress 
upon this truth. Had he known the Sarmatian antiquities published 
by myself, he would certainly have been able to point out many other 
coincidences which are perhaps more remarkable than those which 
he noted, I shall deal with this topic at length in my article, already 
mentioned, on the relations between China and South Russia: for 
the present I will confine myself to a brief summary of the results 
of my investigation, I maintain that the whole military life of China 
was reorganized by the kings of the Han dynasty on Iranian lines. 
The Iranian influence reached China, not directly from Parthta or 
Bactria, but through the medium of the Sarmatian tribes, manjr of 
which, beyond doubt, took part in the Hunnish assaults upon China. 
The Huns had no culture of their own. They borrowed everything, 
especially in their military training, from a more cultivated race, 
the Sarmatians, and particularly the Alans. The indebtedness of 
China, in military matters, to the Sarmatians, is fully proved by the 
following facts. Laufer has shown that the new heavy cavalry of 
China was armed and trained on the same model as we described 


when we were speaking of the military life of the Sarmatians. But 
I must add, that the Chinese adopted not only their scale and ring 
armour from the Sarmatians, their heavy spears, and their conical 
helmets, but their arrows, with the characteristic triangular head, 
their short ring-headed daggers (almost identical with those found in 
Sarmatian graves on the Kuban and those represented in the figures 
of semi-Sarmatian warriors on the funerary stclai of Panticapaeum 
and Tanais), their horse-trappings, which during the Han and suc- 
ceeding dynasties in China are purely Iranian, and last but not least 
their long swords, in w r hich the guard, the pommel and the bottom of 
the scabbard are of jade, just as in the South Russia of the Sarmatian 
period. These jade ornaments, found both in China and in South 
Russia (scores of specimens have been found in Panticapaeum and 
in Sarmatian graves, often with remains of the iron swords), are 
almost identical in the two countries, and are made of the same 
material, the jade of Central Asia. But Sarmatian influence was not 
restricted to the military life of Han China. I have every reason for 
supposing that the habit of interring dozens of clay figures with 
the deceased, to represent the funeral procession, and the type of 
funeral procession itself, were borrowed by the Chinese from the 
nomadic peoples of Central Asia (compare the description of Scythian 
funeral processions on pp. 45, 49,99). It is noteworthy that the clay 
figures of the gods of Death, regularly buried with the dead in China, 
are Iranian : one of these figures reproduces the type of the Iranian 
horned lion -griffin ; the other — a half-human, half-leonine figure, 
the head of which is covered with the skin of an elephant (usually, 
but wrongly, called a unicorn), reminds one of the portraits of Alex- 
ander the Great wearing the elephant helmet, of the symbolic figure 
of Egypt with the same head-dress, and of the portraits of Bactrian 
and Tibetan kings. One more coincidence : strange figures of clay 
are commonly found in the graves of the inhabitants of Panticapaeum 
in the first and second centuries a.d., the period of strong Sarmatian 
influence : fantastic half-human, sometimes grotesque creatures of 
various types ; a puzzle to archaeologists. Exactly similar figures 
are founcf by the dozen in Chinese graves of the Han dynasty. Laufer 
considers them to be personifications of various diseases. 

Here I must leave the subject. The relationship between China 
and South Russia is not new to the scientific world. As early as 1896, 
Reinecke pointed to similarities between certain Scythian and Sar- 
matian objects and certain Chinese. Some of his comparisons are 
not convincing : but some remain : the same rattles in Chinese and 
in Scythian graves ; the same forms of mirror in Sarmatian and 


Chinese graves ; similar shapes of cauldron. But Reinecke's 
explanation of the resemblances is certainly wrong. The phenomena 
which we have observed in the military and religious life of China 
under the Han dynasty show that we have no right whatever to speak 
of Chinese influence on South Russia, on the Scythian and Sarmatian 
world. The opposite is true. The Chinese of the Han dynasty, 
remodelling their life and their civilization to meet fresh requirements, 
borrowed many features from their Central Asiatic neighbours. 
A measure of Sarmatian influence is also noticeable in the art of the 
Han dynasty. It is shown, first and foremost, by the hundreds of 
belt-plaques and plaques for horse-trappings which the Chinese of 
the Han dynasty manufactured for themselves on Sarmatian models. 
Many such have been found in Chinese graves of the Han period, 
and many have been published by Chinese archaeologists in their 
archaeological albums. The best specimens are reproduced in 
pi. XXXI, 2 and 3. Both plaques were found in Northern China, 
near the Chinese Wall, in a grave of the Han period : they are now 
in the Metropolitan Museum of New York. One of them reproduces, 
feature for feature, the dead horse of the Maikop belt and of the 
Siberian gold plaque in the Hermitage (pi. XXV) ; the other has 
a figure of a horse, in the same scheme, killed by two beasts — a lion, 
and a bear or perhaps a lioness. Other equally remarkable coinci- 
dences have been observed by Sir Hercules Read and by Minns. 
The motives of these plaques are entirely foreign to Chinese art of 
the Chu dynasty. They must have been seen by the Chinese on 
Sarmatian warriors, and reproduced by Chinese artists as forming 
part of the new equipment, which was almost wholly Sarmatian. 
But the main stream of Chinese art in the Han dynasty was not 
influenced by these plaques. In Chinese art they remained an 
accident. This does not mean that Chinese art of the Han dynasty 
was unaffected by the influence of the Iranian animal style. But that 
influence did not affect the composition of the ornamental symphonies, 
and it is more noticeable in details than in the general scheme. In 
the details, however, the influence was exceedingly strong : I may 
mention the motive of the head and eyes of the eagle-griffin, a motive 
which is constantly being employed for ornamentation by the Chinese 
artists of the Han period ; the use of vegetable forms for the extremi- 
ties of animals ; the use of figures heraldically confronted ; the 
freedom with which the animals are treated for ornamental purposes : 
all these features are characteristic both of the Chinese animal style 
in the Han dynasty, and of the Sarmatian, We should also notice the 
spread of landscape elements in the decoration of varnished clay 



vases : these elements were probably borrowed directly, together 
with the figures of warriors and hunters, from Parthian art. 

I cannot develop my ideas on this subject more fully in this place. 
It is enough for my purpose to have proved the diffusion of Sarmatian 
culture and art to the East. It is no wonder that this powerful art 
spread to the West as well; and, particularly in its eastern, purely 
Oriental form, to the North, to the forests and swamps of Northern 

. I nave already referred to the influence of the Scythian animal style 
upon the Iron Age in central and eastern Russia. The objects found 
at Ananyino and at Zuevskoe reproduce many of the motives which 
are characteristic of the Scythian animal style in the fifth and fourth 

Fie. 23. 

centuries b. c. Later finds, of the Hellenistic and Roman epoch, in 
the region of Perm, give token of the same influence, which evidently 
spread along the Russian rivers to North Russia and the Baltic Sea. 
The animal style of North Russia preserves all the peculiarities of the 
eastern and northern branch of the Sarmatian animal style : animal 
extremities terminating in heads and beaks of birds or griffins ; 
animal motive piled on animal motive, often in strange combinations ; 
motives repeated in continuous series, sometimes forming a kind of 
fantastic lattice-work which immediately recalls Sarmatian art (fig. 23). 

Now in examining this style, one cannot fail to recognize the 
remarkable analogies which it presents with the animal style of the 
Scandinavian countries. 

I am not a specialist in the art of northern Germany and Scandi- 
navia. I have studied the works on the subject, especially the classic 



3^ Salin ; £ *?■ «<iWnM with the articles and books of Goetze 
and o hers on Gothic art ; and I took advantage of a stay, laS 
several months in Sweden and Norway, to scrutinize the specimen! 
of the style exhibited in the museums of those countries, f forced 
the impression that frorn the third or fourth century A.D., thwart 
was strongly affected by Oriental influence. I regard the GenrLnk 
anima styk as a very original development of lie South Ru^fa^ 
animal style j presenting all the peailiarities of that sivk rTt 
schematizing and geomctrizing it. Look at the evolution of the 

rrsr fei d T^^ There i& *■ »«* ^ness 

ior the fanciful animals of the East ; the same use of animal heads 
especially beak and eye of griffin or bird of prey, to form extremes- 
the same treatment of the animal body as JoInZ^mol^T^ 
same dislocation of animal bodies, with forepart turned m one 
direction, and hindquarters in the other. 

*K;^ en \i h *A • the °PP OIlumTt y of inspecting the Viking funerary 
JV €C f y ^! cov F T ^ , at Oseberg near Christiania (pi XXXII), 
and the funeral furniture belonging to it, many features of that rich 
and luxurious art brought the Scythian animal style vividly before 
iny mind. The carver of the sledges and wagons found in the sliip 
took almost all his motives from the animal style. The animals 
which he used to create his Oriental symphonies were not the fauna 
ol the north— there are no reindeer or elks, and very few deer—* but 
mainly the creatures of Oriental fancy, lions, griffins bird-headed or 
lion-headed, and sphinxes. When he has a large surface to cover 
he uses an intertexture of various fantastic figures, with curiously 
contorted bodies treated in a purely Oriental manner. Sometimes 
this intertexture forms regular palmettes, and just as in the Scythian 
animal style the original animal motives can hardly be made out. 
Sometimes the animals, on which the decoration is based, suggest the 
fantastic fauna of Scythian, Sarmatian and Siberian art, anrfof the 
objects Irom Perm. But when the Scandinavian craftsman sets to 
work on a separate head, he does his very best, and produces real 
gems : but Orient gems. I cannot dwell longer on this topic, but I 
am convinced that it is impossible to understand the Scandinavian art 
ot the first millennium A. D., without previous study of the objects in 
the bcythian animal style. There have indeed been scholars, who 
have turned their attention to the Scythian monuments, in the hope 
that these would shed light on Scandinavian art. But they have never 
studied the subject thoroughly : they have been content to select 
and analyse a few isolated monuments, and compare them with 
Scandinavian works. I am sorry to say that they have done their 


cause more harm than good. We must apply ourselves to the complete 
series, and study it historically. 

That Scandinavian art should be derived from the Oriental art 
of South Russia is not surprising. We have seen that the South 
Russian style spread to North Russia by way of the Russian rivers. 
We must remember, that the arrival of the Goths in the South Russian 
steppes was neither the first nor the last appearance of Germanic 
tribes in South Russia. Excavation in the Dnieper valley has given 
proof of strong Germanic influence in those quarters as early as the 
first century A, D. From that time the Germanic tribes steadily 
advanced southwardSj and entered into contact with the Scytho- 
Sarmatian civilization. It is no wonder that the Scytho-Sarmatian 
civilization spread north-west as well as north-east. 

Much more intricate is the question of the relation borne by 
Romanesque and so-called Gothic art to the Oriental animal style. 
I cannot venture to discuss it ; but I will say that I have noticed 
more than one curious and significant coincidence. 

My task is drawing to a close, I will sum up the principal ideas 
which have guided me in my investigation. The characteristics of 
South Russian civilization are the same in the classical period as in 
subsequent centuries : and the types of phenomena are the same. 
South Russia was always one of the most important centres of civiliza- 
tion. Three main currents are traceable : an eastern current, pro- 
ceeding from both Iranian and Mesopotamian Asia by two routes, 
the Caucasus route, and the Russian steppe route ; a southern 
current from Asia Minor and Greece, which brought with it the 
splendid civilization of Greece ; and a western and northern current, 
by means of which Russia partook in the civilization of central and 
northern Europe. The three currents met in the Russian steppes, 
coalesced, and formed a great civilization, quite independent and 
extremely original, which influenced, in its turn, central and northern 
Russia, and central Europe as well. The sudden development of 
Russian civilization, in the ninth century a.d., on the banks of the 
Dnieper, and its rapid diffusion over the whole of Russia, have been 
counted a very extraordinary thing : the princes of Kiev, in constant 
intercourse with Byzantium and the East, appear to us, from the very 
beginning, as enlightened monarchs who succeeded in founding a 
great centre of civilization and art at Kiev. It all seems natural 
enough, if we remember that the State of Kiev was only one member 
of a long series of civilized states in South Russia ; that it was not the 
first state to establish close relations between South Russia and 
Greece j lastly, that long before, other states had paved the way for 


the advance of southern civilization over the country which later 
became Russia, and that even the intercourse between the Dnieper 
and the Germanic north, and the intercourse between the Dnieper and 
the region of the Danube, were already very ancient in the ninth 
century, I am convinced that it is wrong to make the history of Russia 
begin in the ninth century. In Russia, as in all European countries, 
the date must be put back many centuries : the history of modern 
Europe should begin in the protohistoric and classic period. 


33S3 Et 




IN the ninth century, when the Russian annals first begin to give 
us a systematic record of the Russian people and its princes, 
Russia appears as a well-developed body, as an organized state 
possessing its own peculiar political, social and economic structure 
and endowed with a high and flourishing civilization. Russia of the 
ninth century consisted of many important commercial cities situated 
partly on the Dnieper and its tributaries, partly in the far north on 
Lake Ilmen, and partly in the east on the upper Volga. Each of these 
cities possessed a large territory populated by various Slavonic tribes, 
and had its own self-government with a popular assembly, a council of 
elders, and elected magistrates. To defend its flourishing trade, the 
population of each town issued an invitation to a special body of 
trained and well-armed warriors commanded by a prince ; this prince 
was also entrusted with the tasks of collecting tribute from the popula- 
tion and of carrying out certain administrative and judicial duties. 
These princes with their retinues were generally of Germanic blood, 
and chiefly Norsemen, who were called in Russia Varangers. One of 
these ninth -century princes succeeded in uniting all the Russian cities 
under the rule of one dynasty, and in forming out of them a single, 
though not very firmly established state, with its capital on the Dnieper 

Nothing similar to this kind of federation of large commercial 
self-governing cities, ruled by an invited, that is, a hired dynasty, 
existed at that time in Western Europe with its well-known feudal 
structure. In the history of the formation of the Russian state every- 
thing is peculiar and original : the exclusively commercial character of 
the cities, the wide extension of Russian commerce, which reached Con- 
stantinople in the south, Central Asia, China and India in the east, and 
the Baltic and White Seas in the north, the sharp distinction between 
the self-government of the cities and the primitive tribal organiza- 
tion of the country, the contrast between tire prehistoric manner of 
life in the country population and the high standard of civilized life 
in the cities, and, last but not least, the unparalleled combination of 


foreign military power and well-organized self-rule in the frame of 
a single city state. 

All these peculiarities of Russian origins and the extraordinary 
differences between Russia and western Europe are still unexplained. 
Why should Russia begin her evolution with commerce and city life 
and western Europe with agriculture and the so-called feudal system ? 
Why is it that Russia developed a feudal system much later, not earlier 
than the thirteenth century, when western Europe had already begun 
to abandon that system r Why even then did Russian feudalism 
assume peculiar and original forms which bear little resemblance to 
the corresponding phenomena in western Europe ? 

In spite of many attempts by both Russian and western European 
scholars to solve this problem, it remains unsolved. The main reasons 
for this failure are as follows. It is a mistake to begin the history of 
Russia with the Russian annals in the ninth century, that is, to con- 
found the history of Russia with the history of the Slavonic race. 
The history of Russia as an economic and political organism is much 
more ancient than the earliest references to the Slavonic race. Russia 
as a country existed long before the ninth century, and formed part 
of the civilized world even in the classical period and in the period 
of migrations. At this epoch the main lines of future evolution were 
already laid down. We must therefore treat the history of Russia 
not as the history of the Slavonic race but as the history of the 
country of Russia. I am convinced that, if we treat the history of 
Russia from this point of view, many of the alleged difficulties will 
disappear at once, and the history of Russia in general will appear 
before us in an entirely new light. Let me go more into detail and 
try to explain from this point 01 view the political and social structure 
of the Kievan princedom in the ninth and tenth centuries. 

In the preceding chapters I have tried to show what were the con- 
ditions of life in the steppes of South Russia before it was occupied 
by the German tribes. Let me summarize once more the main 
features of the social and economic life of this period. During this 
whole period the leading part was played in the steppes of South 
Russia by different nomadic tribes. One replaced another : the 
Cimmerians were driven out and conquered by the Scythians ; the 
Scythians gave up their sovereignty under the pressure of the Sarma- 
tians ; but the main structure of the states successively formed by 
these tribes was almost the same. A small minority of nomads with 
a strong and effective military organization ruled over a large majority 
of conquered peoples and tribes . Some of these tribes were themselves 
nomads, but most of them were agriculturists established on the rich 


plains of South Russia or half-nomadic hunters and bee-keepers in 
the forests and marshes of Central Russia. The relations between the 
rulers and the ruled were of the simplest description : the ruled paid 
their masters a tribute in kind (money was not used either by the 
subjects or by the masters ; in the graves which belong to the pre- 
Sarmatian, that is to say, the pre-Roman period, we never find coins), 
and were probably forced to serve them in their military expeditions. 
The fact that so many * Scythians * were sold in the Greet colonies 
of South Russia and went abroad as slaves (for instance, the c Scythian' 
archers who formed the police force of Athens in the fifth and fourth 
centuries B.C.) seems to bear witness to a free disposal of the con- 

?uered population by the conquerors, to a kind of potential slavery, 
must emphasize, by the way, my conviction that most of the slaves 
sold to the Greeks under the name of Scythians did not belong to the 
ruling tribes of Iranian conquerors but to the conquered native pre- 
Scythian population. The name * Scythians * for tne whole popula- 
tion of the Scythian kingdom was in general Greek use during the 
fifth and fourth centuries B.C., and so in the fourth book of Herodotus. 
These political and social conditions explain the peculiar economic 
life of South Russia during the Greco-Scythian and the Greco- 
Sarmatian periods. The main foundation of the strength and the 
wealth of the ruling Scythian tribes was not their productive activity, 
which was very primitive. As pure nomads they produced only mi lit, 
butter and meat for themselves, and hides for commerce. The whole 
wealth of the Scythian kings and princes, as shown by the enormous 
riches buried with them in their graves, depended on their commercial 
activity, on the active part which they took in the international trade 
of the period. The objects which are found in the Scythian and 
Sarmatian graves and which have been analysed in the preceding 
chapters offer eloquent testimony to the importance of Scythian com- 
merce, and enable us to determine the great commercial routes which 
were used by the Scythians in their international commercial relations. 
The main route was, of course, the route of the great South Russian 
rivers to the Black Sea. The Greek merchants paid regular visits 
to the Scythian trading centres on the Bug, the Dnieper and the 
Don, and carried with them to the Greek harbours on the Black Sea 
enormous quantities of food-stuffs and raw materials. These food- 
stuffs and raw materials were partly the tribute paid by the subjects 
of the Scythian kings : grain and iish which were furnished by the 
settled population of the banks of the great rivers and their tributaries, 
hides paid by the nomads, furs, wax and honey by the hunters and bee- 
keepers of the forests. But part of this merchandise was itself the 


product of the lively commerce which naturally grew up between 
the inhabitants of the Scythian kingdom and the independent Finnish 
tribesof Central and Eastern Russia, who dwelt on the middle and upper 
courses of the great Russian rivers : Volga, Ok5, Kama, Don, Donets, 
Dnieper, Pripet, Desna. Moreover, products of the Far East were 
brought to £*>uth Russia by the caravans which started from Central 
Asia and Western Siberia and made for the shores of the Black Sea, 
The merchants of Central Asia and Siberia were doubtless obliged to 
sacrifice a proportion of their merchandise as tribute or custom 
duties to the Scythian rulers of South Russia, who retained part for 
their ow r n use, and sold part to the Greek merchants. Here again, 
a traffic between these merchants and the inhabitants of South Russia 
w r as bound to grow up. 

The age-long existence of such commerce, protected by the military 
forces of the Scythian state, contributed on the one hand to increase of 
productivity in the Scythian state itself and in the neighbouring 
countries, and on the other hand to the development of numerous 
commercial centres of the city type on the banks of the Russian 
rivers. The Greek geographers of the fourth and third centuries B.C. 
do not tell us the names of these cities, as they had no independent 
knowledge of South Russia and mostly repeated the data of the Ionian 
geographers of the sixth century B.C. But the geographers of the 
Hellenistic and Roman epoch, especially Ptolemy, enumerate scores 
of such places on the banks of the Bug, the Dnieper, the Don and the 
Kuban. The half-Greek city of the Gelonians, mentioned by Herodo- 
tus, was undoubtedly of this type. I have already mentioned the 
remains of such cities, partially but unsystematically excavated by 
Russian archaeologists, and the large rich cemeteries which surround 
them. The most brilliant period of these native cities is shown by 
the contents of the graves to have been the fourth and third centuries 
B.C. The population of the cities, according to the objects found 
in the graves, was a mixture of Greek, Scythian and native elements. 
Most of the inhabitants must have been merchants. 

These cities contributed largely to the formation of constant and 
regular commercial relations between the shores of the Black Sea and 
the whole of Central and Northern Russia including the shores of the 
Baltic, They indicated for all future generations the main commercial 
highways of Russia, and above all, the great river route from Scandi- 
navia to Constantinople, the future route * from the Varangers to the 

Greeks'. — 

^When the Scythian state was destroyed by the joint efforts of the 
Sarmatians, the Bosphoran kingdom, the Thracians and the Celts, the 


place of the Scythians was taken by different Sarmatian tribes. These 
new formations were by no means stable. Each Sarmatian tribe 
tended to move westward with the object of reaching the flourishing 
and civilised Roman provinces, A state of anarchy began to prevail 
in these lands. The first to exploit this state of anarchy were the 
Germans. It is well known that in the first century B. c. and the first 
century a. D. the German tribes showed a tendency to get into touch 
with the Greco-Roman world both in the west and in the east. They 
followed the footsteps of the Celts, who in the third and second 
centuries B. c. had flooded the whole of the Balkan peninsula and had 
reached even Greece and Asia Minor. 

But the German advance was stopped in the west, both on the 
Rhine and on the Danube, by the Romans. The expeditions of 
Julius Caesar and of Augustus, and the military efforts of their suc- 
cessors during the first and the second centuries A. D,, set up a strong 
barrier against the advance of the German tribes towards the west 
and the south- The armed frontiers of the Rhine and the Danube, 
where Rome concentrated her best military forces, were an insur- 
mountable barrier against the Germans. No wonder if the wave of 
German tribes was deflected towards the east and the Germans used 
for their advance to the south the only open and unprotected way, 
the way which they had known for ages — the great river route * from 
the Varangers to the Greeks ', the route of the Dnieper. 

I have already dealt with this movement. The archaeological data 
prove with certainty that it began as early as the first century B.C., and 
became very important in the first and second centuries a, d. We have 
already seen that, just at this time, German cemeteries and German 
settlements become common on the Dnieper. One of the most 
important features which characterize the German graves in Western 
and Southern Russia is the presence, side by side with certain home- 
made objects, of large quantities of objects imported from the Greco- 
Roman world — especially Greco-Roman pottery (such as terra sigil- 
lata), Greco-Roman glass-ware, jewellery, &c. A new phenomenon is 
that the trade of the Greco-Roman world with the Dnieper basin and 
Russia in general no longer took the form of barter, as in the Greco- 
Scythian period, but was carried out by means of coined money, 
Roman silver and copper, the universal currency of the period. Coins 
of the Bosphoran kings found access even to the Germanized regions of 
South Russia. Characteristically enough, however, the Sarmatian 
tribes of South Russia still preserved the ancient Scythian habit of 
barter, and did not accept Roman and Bosphoran coins, even gold. 

It is a pity that there are no full statistics about the finds of Roman 


coins in South Russia, whether in graves, or in the form of hoards. 
Observations collected by Russian and foreign scholars, especially the 
Swedish scholar Arne, show that the trade was liveliest in the second 

and t hird centuries A. D^, especially in the second, between the reigns 
of Nefva and of Septimius Sevcrus. Most of the coins belong to the 
reigns of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. The finds are thickest 
in the region of Kiev, Poltava and Chernigov, that is, in the region 
where civilized life had attained a high level during the final period 
of Scythian domination, the fourth and third centuries B.C. But 
this region was no longer in direct communication with the Bosphoran 
kingdom, and no longer formed a commercial province of that state. 
The scarcity of Bosphoran, and thc j>revalence of Roman coins i n the 
reg ion of th e mi ddle D nicpershow that jjje^Bosphoran kingdom was 
driven from the region oTthe Dnieper and turned its attention exclu- 
sively to_l^rterinj^_whh_the^ Sarmatian trib es, while the German 
population of the Dnieper region entered into direct relations with the 
Roman provinces of the Danu be, and thus came to form, no longer a 
part of the Greek commercial world, but a kind of annex to the Roman 
Danube trade. The same conditions prevailed in the region of the 
upper Dnieper and as far north as the shores of the Baltic Sea. Roman 
trade was also supreme in the districts which now belong to the Polish 
state. Thus once again, as in the period before the Greek colonization 
of the shores of the Black Sea, th e w^st to ok. tV>p leadi ng part jn %\ua 
civilized lifg_o f Western and SoutrT-Westcrn Russia. 

Various Roman objects of the first and second centuries a. d., 
found in Eastern Russia and Western Siberia, raise the question, 
whether Eastern Russia and Western Siberia also belonged to the 
domain of Roman provincial trade. As far as our knowledge reaches, 
I am inclined to think that these objects were imported to the region 
of the Kama and to Siberia not from the region of the Dnieper, but 
up the Volga, through the medium of the Bosphoran kingdom, which 
held constant intercourse both with the Volga region and with the 
steppes of Western Siberia. 

This change in the orientation of the commercial relations of 
Western and South- Western Russia was due to the German occupa- 
tion of the valleys of the Dnieper and its tributaries. In their 
own country, the Germans had regular commercial relations with 
Italy, Gaul, the Alpine and the Danubian Roman provinces. No 
wonder if, after their occupation of the valley of the Dnieper, they 
preserved these commercial relations and developed them. It is only 
natural to suppose that in their expansion towards the south and the 
east they constantly came into conflict with the Sarmatian tribes which 


were moving in the opposite direction, towards the west. These 
constant collisions made it impossible to maintain the old trade 
relations between the Dnieper and the Bosphoran kingdom, and created 
conditions which were exceedingly favourable for the merchants of the 
Roman Danube provinces. 

In their gradual occupation of the Dnieper basin, the Germans did 
not aim at destroying the existing commercial relations and the existing 
commercial centres. They tried to use these relations for their own 
profit. No wonder therefore that they do not appear to have destroyed 
the cities in South Russia. It seems on the contrary that they rather 
increased the number. The large number of cities mentioned by 
Ptolemy and located by him on the Dnieper gives the impression that 
the Germans were more anxious to develop the cities than to do away 
with them. Further investigation will show if I am right in assuming 
such a tendency in the Germans of South Russia. 

In any case, it is only in the light of this gradual occupation of the 
Dnieper basin by the German tribes during the early period of the 
Roman Empire, that we are able to understand the invasion of South 
Russia by the Goths, and their speedy and successful conquest of the 
shores of the Black Sea. The Gothic invasion w T as not the nrst but the 
last act of the age-long activity of the Germans in South Russia. If we 
are right, as I think we are, in assuming the existence of a large German 
population on the Dnieper in the first and second centuries A. D., we 
can easily understand that the Germans, some of whom were daring 
sailors, hankered for the sea-shore, which would give them the 
opportunity of plundering and holding to ransom the eastern part 
of the Roman Empire, and of entering into direct commercial relations 
with the wealthy East. We must not forget that the constant relations 
of the Germans with Olbia had showed them how much richer and 
more attractive the Roman East was than the Roman West. It is not 
to be wondered at, if they used the first opportunity, namely, the 
internal troubles in tbe Roman Empire which prevented the Romans 
from protecting their Greek * allies * on the shores of the Black Sea, 
for invading the steppes of South Russia and capturing, first of all, the 
important harbours of Olbia and Tyras. The capture of Olbia and 
Tyras was a military necessity, because these cities with their Roman 
garrisons were the chief obstacle against the Germans seizing and 
settling down on the shores of the Black Sea, The seizure of Olbia and 
Tyras did not mean the complete destruction of these cities. Coins 
and inscriptions show that the cities continued to exist for some scores 
of years after they were captured by the Goths. But they ceased to be 
important commercial centres, as the Goths, like the Kievan princes 


later, preferred to enter into direct relations with the Greek cities on the 
Thracian Bosphonis and the southern shore of the Black Sea. 

We do not know much about the history of the great Gothic 
state thus established on the shores of the Black Sea, either during its 
independent existence, or during the supremacy of the Huns. One 
fact however is characteristic. The Goths did not attempt to destroy 
theBosphoran kingdom, and after vanquishing the Sarmatians they 
preferred to enter into a kind of alliance with them. We know that 
the Bosphoran kingdom continued to exist, perhaps under the rule of 
a new dynasty, which was apparently not of German stock but of Sar- 
matian origin. We know also that the Alans preserved their indepen- 
dence, and continued to exist and to rule on the banks of the Kuban 
and perhaps of the Eton as well. Moreover, the Bosphoran kingdom 
maintained its commercial relations with the Roman Empire. The 
rich f ourth-century grav es already mentioned, where among other 
objects we notice silver dis h^m scrioed with the name of the Emperor _ 
Constantius^ show that the Bosphoran kings received * presents ' 

(disguised "tribute) from the Roman emperors. ~The Goths probably 
used Panticapaeum, their vassal, as they used Olbia and Tyras, both as 
a starting-point for their expeditions against the Roman Empire, and 
as a harbour which allowed them to receive goods not only from the 
Orient through the Sarmatians, but also from the eastern provinces 
of the Roman Empire. The large quantity of objects of Greek 
workmanship founo both at Panticapaeum and at Chersonesus in 
graves of the fourth and fifth centuries a.d., and the spread of 
Christianity in both places at the same epoch, show that the relations 
between these cities and the Roman Empire were not always hostile. 

We have every ground for supposing, that Chersonesus never became 

subj ec^to _theJjothic Ju ngSj but_wag_kept and fortified by the Roman 
emp erors ~of the iou rtfi, centur y as the last str o nghol d of Eorrjan_ 
po wer in the Crimea. An inscription of Talentinian published by 
myself, and certain traditions, half legendary and half historical, which 

date from the time of Constantine, illustrate the effort s of t he Roman 

E mpire to protect Chersonesus fr o m Gothic and B osphor an attack s. 
These data show that the period of Gothic domination in Russiawas 
not simply a period of constant Gothic attacks on the Roman Empire 
by land and sea. We may suppose with great probability that the 
Goths resumed the threads of the ancient commerce of Russia both 
with the Orient and with the Greek world , Like their predecessors, the 
Goths formed an exclusively commercial and military state, and this 
state lasted for more than two centuries. An important feature of 
this new formation was that the Gothic state was not ruled by nomads, 

13H F f 


but by tribes which in their own country were accustomed to the 
settled life of farmers, warriors and sailors. The Huns who displaced 
the Goths in South Russia wer e o f course no mads. We know practi- 
cally nljtlnng of their relations with, the Gothic and Sarmatian tribes 
in South Russia. But the part which the Germans and the Iranians 
took iri^thfi^peditions of the Huns against the Roman Empire, and 
the fact that they survived untiT theTall~bf 'The Huns, preserving the 
tribal organization of their state, shows that even during this domination 
they were vassals of the Huns rather than peoples absorbed by the 
Mongolian invaders. The Gothic epoch was accordingly a revival of 
the Scythian and the Sarmatian state in a new shape, a shape which 
reminds us of the later Slavonic state on the Dnieper and the shores 
of the Black Sea. 

The Germans — warriors and keen sailors — were always attracted 
by the wealth of the Roman Empire. As soon as they felt that the 
mighty organism of the Roman Empire, in the critical period of the 
third century, was beginning to weaken and to break up, they renewed 
their attacks on the Roman provinces. The ..weakest point in the 
Roman Empire was of course the Danube frontier, a long and difficult 
frontier without a civilized hinterland. But to overcome the Germans* 
superstitious fear of the Roman legions, supposed invincible, and to 
transform scattered attacks into an overwhelming movement, a strong 
shock from behind was needed. This shock was dealt to the German 
tribes in Russia by the first Mongolian invaders of Europe, the mighty 
Huns. Under their pressure a detachment of the German tribes, 
and of the Iranian tribes with which the Germans lived in a kind of 
federation, the Visigoths and the Alans, made the first rush into 
the Roman Empire. The consequence is well known, and I need not 
repeat the story. Soon after, the Huns themselves under Attila, 
dragging with them the Ostrogoths and scores of German and 
Iranian tribes, followed the victorious march of their predecessors. 

The outcome of these events was of the utmost importance for 
Russia. In the fifth and sixth centuries Russia was swept clean of 
her German, Iranian, and Mongolian rulers and inhabitants. Small 
fractions of th e_ Alans r emain ed on the Kub an, wh ere they still dwell 
under the name^o TUssetes ; some tribes of Goths were left behind 
in the Crimea (the kingdom of Mangup near Chersonesus) and on the 
Taman peninsula (the Tetraxite Goths near Phanagoria) ; scattered 
bands of Huns, after their downfall, came back to the Russian steppes *, 
but not one of these groups played any part in the future destinies of 
Russia, The place of the Germans was soon occupied by a new 
European people, the Slavs. They had originally dwelt, as far as our 


knowledge reaches, o n the no rthern slopes of the Carpathians, towards 
the Vistula and the Baltic SeaT ~"According to Ptolemy and to Jordanes, 
they were well known to the Romans, and were divided into three 
parts — t he Wends, the S claye nes an d_the_ Antes. During the domi- 
nation oFthe Gotns in South Russia they were vanquished by them 
and formed a part of the Gothic Empire, under a kind of vassalage. 
But in the sixth century the same Jordanes, a Goth himself who was 
well acquainted with the condition of north-eastern Europe, knew of 
their continuous settlements on the Dnieper and of their occupation 
of the steppes as far as the Black Sea. It is evident therefore that the 
Slavs repeated the movement of the Germans and replaced them in 
South Russia. Thus they founded in South Russia a state of the same 
type as the Germans before them, and naturally inherited from them 
their towns, their trade relations, and their civilization. This civiliza- 
tion was not, of course, a German one, but the ancient Greco-Iranian 
civilization of the Scythians and the Sarmatians, slightly modified* 
At the very outset of their life in South Russia they were threatened by 
a great danger. New conquerors of the same stock as the Huns, the 
Avars, tried to overpower them and to drag them into Western Europe, 
But the young Slavonic federation was strong enough to repulse this 
attack and to annihilate the Avars, giving rise to the old Russian saying 

preserved by our Annals ; * Tbevperisne d like the Avars \ 

The Slavs took firm root on the Dnieper, and spreacF widely to the 
north and to the east, occupying all the old highways of commerce. 
In the north they developed Novgor od j in the east they founded 
Rost6v«i n_ the south, op posite Panticapaeurn, ITmutara^n^ The 
cdnditions^vere favourable, lheir ancient relations with the Germans 
secured them the military help of wandering Scandinavian chieftains, 
who were prepared to serve and to fight for anyone, provided that they 
had good opportunities of enriching themselves. The Germans 
helped the Slavs to find the ancient way to Constantinople and to 
protect their commercial fleet on the Dnieper. Southward, the rule 
of the new masters on the Volga, the Mongolian tribe of th e IChazars— 
the peaceful rule of a trading people— guaranteed them the Oriental 
market. So they grew strong and rich and developed a lively trade 
withfthe German north, the Finnish north-east, the Arabic south-east, 
and especially the Byzantine south. This was as before the main source 
of their civilization and their wealth, and it dictated the forms of their 
political and social life. Their centres were as before the great cities 
on the Dnieper, and the most important of these cities was of course 
Kiev, thanks to her wonderful geographical situation in the middle of 
the Dnieper basin, midway between the Baltic and the Black Sea. 


In the light of this historical evolution, the history and structure 
of Kievan Russia, the Russia of the eighth to the twelfth centuries, 
assume a new form. The Russia of Kiev was at the same time the last 
link of an ancient historical chain and the first of a new one. Kievan 
Russia was the immediate successor of the series of commercial states 
which had replaced one another in the steppes of South Russia from 
time immemorial, and at the same time the mother of the sub- 
sequent Slavonic Russian states in Western Russia (the Galicia of 
to-day), on the upper course of the Dnieper (the modern White Russia), 
and, most important of all, between the upper Volga and the Oka, 
Great Russia, the Russia of modern times. 

Kievan Russia, in the first period of her evolution, naturally 
inherited all the peculiarities of her predecessors. Like them she was 
an almost purely commercial state ; like them she tried to occupy 
the shores of the Black Sea ; and her political and cultural life, like 
theirs, faced south and east, towards Greece and the Orient, and not 
west, tow r ards the Western Roman world. It is only natural therefore 
that the civilization of the Russia of Kiev was a southern civilization, 
an offspring of classical culture in that Greco-Oriental aspect which 
was characteristic of Byzantium and the Byzantine Empire. Kiev_ 
and Novgorod in Russia were little Constantin oples ; so were 
Trebizonq on the_sou thern~ shore oFlhe jjlacTSea , the gorgeous 
Georgian capital, Ani, and t he various centres of the Balkan Slavs, 
especially SiQ fia in B ulgaria and Bdgradejn Serbia. We must not 
forget that thelniain centre of politicalTioclal, religious and economic 
life both at Kiev and at Novgorod was the cathedral of S. Sophia, 
which stood in the same relation to the palace and the person of the 
Kievan Great Prince (Veliki Knyaz) as the great S. Sophia of Con- 
stantinople to the Byzantine emperor and his residences. 

But Russia did not receive the whole heritage of the Greco- 
Oriental civilization. She had not the same opportunities in the East 
as Italy, France and Spain in the Western classical world. The 
strivings of the Kievan princes towards the Black Sea and the Caspian 
Orient were not successful. Svyatoslav, of course, nearly succeeded 
in destroying and conquering the two strongholds of Oriental civiliza- 
tion in Eastern Russia — the Kaganate of the Khazars on the Volga and 
the Don, and the kingdom of the Bulgars on the Kama. But his 
successes were temporary. The Khazars were soon replaced in the 
steppes of South Russia by a new Mongolian horde, the Pechenegs: 
and when the Kievan princes had almost managed to reduce the 
Pechenegs to comparative harmlessness, a new and powerful tribe 
of Mongolians appeared in the South Russian steppes — t he Polovtsy 


or Cumans, The forces of the Kiev an princedom were almost 
entirely absorbed by the constant struggle with these dangerous 
enemies, who received regular reinforcements from the Orient; 
and Russia was gradually cut off from the south and the east. She 
was driven into the Central Russian forests and swamps and into the 
Carpathian mountains. The final blow to Russia was struck by the 
hordes of the Tatars, a branch of the mighty Mongolian kingdom in 
Central Asia. Against such an enemy Russia in her Kievan condition 
was powerless. The Tatars occupied all the highways of commerce 
towards the east, seized the mouths of the great Russian rivers, drove 
the Russians from the Dnieper and made them their vassals. Like 
the Scythians between the eighth and the third centuries B.C., they 
kept the still important trade with the Western world in their own 
hands, using as intermediaries the Italian colonies on the Black Sea _ 
and in the Crimea, the heirs of the Greek colonies — Kafa (Formerly 
Theodosia), Sudak, Kerch (Panticapaeum) in the Crimea , Akkerman _ 
(the ancient Tyras) on the Bug, and the rest. The Russian part in 
this trade was reduced tcT furmsTifng the Tatars with the products 
of the Russian forests, in the form of tribute. The Russians were 
forced to retreat to the Carpathians in the west, to the swamps of the 
upper Dnieper and the Pnpet in the north-w T est, and to the forests 
01 the upper Volga and the Oka in the east. 

But m retreating the Russians carried with them the traditions of 
Kievan Russia and the important achievements in" civilised life which 
had been the result of their constant relations with the Greek and 
Oriental world during the centuries in which the Kievan state had 
existed. We must not forget that these centuries enabled the Russians 
not only to use the blessings of classical civilization, but also to form 
their own Slavonic classical culture, a culture similar to the Byzantine, 
but at the same time highly distinctive. The wonderful bloom of ai t 
in the Russia whose capital was the city of Vladimir, during the 
eleventh, twelfth and mirteenth cen tu ries, and in the Gali cian Russia_ 
of The same period, sh ows how deeply clas sical civiliz ation jiad taken 
root in Russia! TheTatar voice ^prevented the Russians irbm^eveTop- . 
ing this inrlentance toThe Full and~from becoming the complete 
successors of the Byzantine Empire. But this inheritance enabled 
the Russia of Moscow to escape dissolution in the sea of Eastern 
nomads, to preserve her nationality, her religion and her state, and 
later to enter the family of European nations with her own peculiarities 
and her own national spirit. 

In this new period, the development of Russia had no longer its 
old orientation towards the south and the east. The force of cir- 


cum stance — the decay of civilized life in the Byzantine Empire, the 
pressure of the Tatars — made Russia look westward, towards the 
Baltic ; to join Western Europe and its cultural development now 
became the ultimate goal of Russian effort. 

Cut off from the Oriental trading routes ; impeded in their move- 
ment towards the west by the Germans, the Lithuanians, the Poles, and 
later the Swedes; the Russians ceased to be a nation of merchants, 
and the Russian state becamfe an agricultural state, a state of peasants" 
( and landowners. Thus Russia, in a comparatively late period of her 
existence, set foot on the path which was characteristic of the develop- 
ment of feudal Europe in the early Middle Ages. But here also the 
peculiar conditions of Russian history made the progress of Russia in 
this path slow and strange. 

History knows no pauses and interruptions in its evolution. Nor 
are there any in the history of Russia. The Slavonic is one of the 
epochs in the evolution of Russia as such. But the Slavonic race 
succeeded in accomplishing one cardinal thing, which neither the 
Thracians nor the Iranians, neither the Germans nor the Mongolians 
had been able or willing to perform. For these peoples Russia was 
an expedient to achieve their main aim — the conquest of Western 
Europe. For the Slav3, Russia was their final aim and became their 
country. They bound themselves to the country for ever: and 
Russia is indebted to them, not only for her name, but also for her 
peculiar statehood and civilization. 





A, History of the archaeological discoveries in South Russia 

M.Koetovtzeff, article on South Russia in **«. K^t, i 

by the Russian Academy, La Science r US se *** P* 8 ** 1 * » ** published 

B. General tooth on South Russia. 

miruHomde, ParU, ,89. ^AS^lkn^?i^l?2Sf^? te *^ * ^«&6 
(inRtaUn)^^' A °"^ «* * "<»*« ?&&»*.. P W og™l. ,„, • 

C. Sources, 
(a) Literary. 

,897.' E ' BOnMl1 ' ***• * r -M**-*-**-**. vol*, i, ii, St. Pcerebu^, ,882. 
£« (pushed fc Tr^J^^^uJ^Arc^^af^ Z% V^ 

(A) Epigraphic. 
U) Numismatic- 


3. Minns, Ll. t p. 661 ff. {Coin plates) and passim. 

4. Moscow Numismatic Society, Numismatic Miscellany, 1908-19 16 (4 volumes). 

5. Rostovtzeff, Studies, &c, part ii, Epigraph it and numismatic sources, 

(d) Archaeological. 

I, AntiquiUs du Bosphore Cimmirien conservies au Muse'e imperial de FErmitage, 
St, Petersburg, 1854 (i-ii, text ; iii t plates). Republication of the French text (in 
abbreviated form with many additions) and the plates by S. Reinach, Bibliothique des 
Monuments figure's, Paris, 1892 (with copious indices, containing references to the C. R. 
(see below). Archaeological Commission. [Quoted A.B.CA 

4. Antiquitis de la Scythie eTHtrodote, 1 (1866), ii (1873), and Atlas. St. Petersburg, 
Archaeological Commission. [Quoted A.SJI.] 

3. Minns, 1.1., chaps, vii-xiii. 

4- Rostovtzeff, Studies, p. iii, Archaeological Sources. 

5. Y. I. Smirn6v, Argenterie orientak. Recueil d*ancienne vaisselk orientate en argent 
et or trouvie principalement en Russia, St. Petersburg, 1909. 

6. M. Rostovtzeff, Ancient Decorative Painting in South Russia, i, text (in Russian), 
ii, plates (in Russian and French), St. Petersburg, 19.13 ; the same, Ancient Decorative 
Wall-painting, Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxxix {1919). 

D. Periodicals. 

1. Compie rendu dt la Commission [Imperiale] Archiologiqite (after 19 17 without the 
epithet Impfaiale like the other publications of the [Imperial] Archaeological Com- 
mission) ; 1 859- 1 88 1 , yearly reports (in French and Russian) , and supplements by Stephani 
(in German and Russian), ana Atlas; 1882-1888, report (in French and Russian) and 
Atlas ; 1 880- , brier reports (in Russian only) with illustrations, no Atlas. Full 
reports on archaeological excavation from 1898 in B.C.A. (see below). [Quoted CM.] 

2. Bulletin de la Commission [Imperiale] Archiologique, 1901- (65 parts in 1918), 
with special bibliographical supplement. [Quoted B.CJl.\ A new series of the Bulletin 
was started in ioai under the title Bulletin of the Russian Academy of the History of Material 
Civilisation. (Quoted BJtM.C] 

3. Materials for the Archaeology of Russia , i860- (37 parts in 19 18). [Quoted 

4. Transactions of the Historical and Antiquarian Society of Odessa, vols, i (1844) to 
xxxii (1915Y. 

5. Bulletin of the Taurie Record Commission* i (1882) to liii (1916). 

6. Transactions of the Archaeological Congresses, vols, i (1869) to xv (191 1) 
[Full list in Minns, 1,1., pp. xxv ff.jj 

7. B. Farmakovski, Reports on archaeological excavations in South Russia, published 
yearly (last report (for 19 13) printed in 1914) in the Archaeologischer Anzeiger of the 
Jahrhuch des Deutschen Archaeologischen Imtituts, with copious illustrations (quoted as 
Farmakovski, A.A,). 

8. Report (with illustrations) for the years 1916 and 1917, B.CJk,, 65 (1918), 157 fif. 


1. Painted pottery in South Russia. 

Minns, LI., 1-52 ff. ; compare Karl Hadaczek, La Colonic mdustrieUe de Kosxylowce 
de Pepoque ene'olitkique 1 Lvov, 1914; M. Homes, Urgeschichte der bildenden Kunst in 
Europa, 2nd ed. (1915), 304 ff. and 606 ff. ; new finds by Himner near Uman in the 
Ukraine ; E. Maiewski, Bulletin et Mimorres de la Sociiti a" Anthropologic de Paris, 1913, 
226; compare tj. B., V ' Anthropologic, xxvi (1915), 575 (clay model of a house and 
a dwelling-area on piles, found together with painted potter)'). Clay model of a wagon- 
house found in a grave of the copper period near the Ulski aul (on the Kuban), B.C. A. 35, 


1 ff. ; Fanmakovski, A. A. 1910. 195, fig. 1. Similar finds of models of houses in neolithic 
settlements have been recently matte in Bulgaria : (1) Kodjadermen barrow near Shumen 
(B. Filow, A.A. t 191c, 218, fig. 1) 1; and (a) barrow near Salmanovo (B. Filow, ibid., 
'9*3* 343 ff«« and Bulletin de la Sociiti archeologique bulgare, iv (1914), 148 f?,). 
z. Incised pottery of the Kharkov government, 

GorodtsOv, Bytovdya Arhhmlogia (Archaeology of Material Ctvilizatwn) t Moscow , 
1910 ; Transactions of the Archaeological Congress at Kharkov, xii t 1902, and Ekaterinoslav 
xiii, 1905 ; Report of the Historical Museum of Moscow for 191 6. 

3. The origin of iron. 

P. Oxy. x. 12^1, v. 3 ff. ; Belck, Zeitschrift filr Ethnologie, 1907, 359 and 363; 
O, Montelius, Prafastorische Zeitschrift, v (1913), 28 ff,, esp, 328 ff. 

4 . The Copper Period in the Kuban district. 

M. Rostovtzeff, USge du cuivre dans le Cavcase Septentrional et ks civilisations de 
Soumer et de lEgypte protodynastique. Revue arcteofogique, 1920. Idem, The Treasure of 
Asterabad t Journal of Egyptian Archaeology , 1920. 

5. Pre-Vannic Antiquities in Southern Caucasus. 

Countess P. Uv&rov, The Cemeteries of Northern Caucasus, Materials for the Archaeo- 
logy of the Caucasus, viii (Moscow), 1900; A. Ivanovski, In Transcaucasia, ibid., 
vi (Moscow), 1911; Farmakovski, MJI.R. 34 (1914), 37 (all in Russian)- compare 
the reports on the excavations in Transcaucasia made by A. Rfisslcr and others in CJi. 
1895-1905, and Verhandhingen der Berliner Gesellschaft fur Anthropologic, &c, Zeitschrift 
fiir Ethnologic, 1895-1905, Previous publications : Chantre, Rechercnes anthropohgiques 
dans le Caucase, 1 (1885) ; Fr. Bayern, Vntersuchungen uber die dltesten Graber- und 
Schafzfunde in Kaukasien, Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologie., 1885, supplement ; J. de Morgan, 
Mission scientifique au Caucase, i, ii (1889) ; the same, Mission scientifique en Perse , 
iv (1896), i£ ff. ; Recherches au Talysch Person, Delegation scientifique en Perse, 
Mfanoires, viii (1905), 251 ; W. Belc£, Vethandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft fiir 
Anthropologie, &c, Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologie, 1893, 64 ; R. Virchow, Abhandhingen 
der Berliner Akademie, 1895, Phys -math. KL, 1 ff. 

6. Religious beliefs of the most ancient population in the Kuban district, and the Amazons. 

M. Rostovtzeff, Le Culte de la grande de'esse et les Amazones en Russie miridionale, V 
Revue des Etudes Grecques (jubilee number, ro**). 3 2, C !*(/%) </(/ 1 " V? I 


j , Cimmerians and Scythians in the eighth and seventh centuries, 

{a) Oriental tradition. 

M. Streck, Asswbanipal und die leixten assyrischen Konigt bis zum Untergange 
Nmivehsj Leipzig, 1916 {Vorderasiatische BibliotkehS, p. cccbtxi, n. 1 (gives a good but 
incomplete bibliography). In addition to the bibliography given by this writer, see 
H. Winckler, The History of Babylonia and Assyria, London, 1907, 225 ; Jeremias, The 
Old Testament in the Light of the Ancient East, i (1911)1 275 I F - Witt*, Das Skythen- 
problem itn Jeremiabucke (R. Kittel, Alttestamenttiche Studien, 13 (Leipzig, »Qi3)« 222); 
C. II. W. Johns, Ancient Assyria (191a), 116 and 136 ; W. Rogers, A History of Babylonia 
and Assyria (6th ed., 1915). ii. 320, 329, 412 ff. j Thurcau-Dangin, La huitieme campagne 
de Sargon, Paris, 1912, p. x ff. ; Ol instead, Western Asia tit the days of Sargon of Assyria 
(Cornell Studies in History and Political Science, ii), 148. : id.. Western Asia in the reign 
of Sennacherib, American Historical Association, Annual Report (1909), Washington, 1911 , 
94; E. G. Rlauber, American Journal of Semitic Languages, 28 (1911-12), 101 comp. 24^ ; 
V. Smolin, Transactions of Kazan University, 1914 or 1915 (quoted from mernoiy); 
S. Feist, Kuttur, Ausbreitung und Herhunft der Iniogermanen, Berlin, 1913, 404 ft", j 

3.1S3 G g 


G. H using, Vofkerschkhten in Iran, Mitth. der anthrop. Gesellschaft in Wien, xlvi (1916), 
199 ff. ; Lehmann-Haupt, Paulv-Wissowa-Kroll, Real-Encyclopaedie, ix, s.v, Kimmerier, 
cp. Kim, xvii (1920), 113 ff. j ft. Vambery, Primitive Kutiur der Turko-tatarischen Volker 
(1879), 103 f., 133 (pleads for die Mongolian origin of the Cimmerians), cp- O, Schrader, 
Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte, ii (3rd cd.), 528, 

(b) Vannic Kingdom. 

Patltanov y Journal of the Ministry of Public Instruction, 1883, December (in Russian) ; 
V. Nikolski, Cuneiform Inscriptions of the Vannic Kings discovered in Russia; Oriental 
Antiquities (Moscow), i. 375-453 (in Russian), and various articles in the Transactions of 
the Russian Archaeological Society, Oriental branch ; B. Turaev, History of the Ancient 
Orient, ii (1912), 46 (in Russian) ; N. Marr, Bulletin de I' Academic des Sciences de Russie, 
1918 (results of the new excavations in Van during the War ; quoted from memory) ; 
Hyvernat, Du Caucase au Golfe Persique, Washington, 1892 ; Pr&lek, Geschichte der 
Meder und Perser > i. 50 ff, ; H. Wtnckler, The History of Babylonia and Assyria, London, 

1907, 225 ff. ; Lchmann-Haupt, Armenian einst und jetzt; Hall, The Ancient History 
of the Near East (1913), 516; S. Feist, Kultur, Attsbreitung und Herkunft der Indagermanen, 
Berlin, 1913, 403. Archaeology : Lehmann-Haupt, Maieriatien ssur alteren Geschichte 
Armeniens, Gattinger Abhandlungen, ix (1907) ; Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, vii. 265 ; 
ix. 95 ; British Museum : A Guide to the Babylonian ana Assyrian Antiquities, 2nd cd, 

1908, p. 106 ; Pcrrot and Chipiez ii. 224 ; Heuzey, Origines oriental** de Fart, 231 J 
Farmakovski, The Archaic Period in Russia> MJl.R. 34 ( 1914), 45 ff. Hittite inscriptions in 
Van : Hommel and Sayce, Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 1899 (xx), 238. 

(c) Greek tradition. 

Gutschmid, Kleine Schriften, iii. 430 ; ¥» 109 ; Duncker, Geschichte des Altertums, 
i 4 . 395. P. 463; E. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, i l . §§ 406* 424, 452-3 I "- i» 
§ 286 ; i, 2 3 ( I 529 J compare § 423 ; Mullenhoff, Deutsche Alter tumskunde, ii^, (1906), 162, 
and iii (passtm); E„ Rohde, Rhevnsches Museum, 1881, 555 1 E. Thraemer, Pergamos, 
Leipzig, 1888, 330 • U. HQfer, De Cimmeriis (programme), Beigrad, 1891 ; Dittenberger, 
Onentts Graecx inscriptiones, N. 13, compare M, O. Oi&pari, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 
l( r l $ (JS) * *73 t W» Leonhard, Paphlagoma, Reisen und Forschungen (1915)1 298. 

(d) Greek mythological tradition. 

Count I. Tolstoy, The White Island and the Taurihe on the Euxine, Petrograd, 191 3. 
Compare my review, B,CJ1> 65 (1918), 177 ff, 

(e) Ninus and Sesostris, 

Gutschmid, Kleine Schriften, v. 26 and 90 ff. ; Sethe, Vntersuchungtn ssur Geschichte 
Aegyptens, ii ; Zeitschrift fiir agyptische Sprache, 41, 34 ff. ; Maspero, Journal des Satwnts, 
'■J 01 ! 594 * E - Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, 1. z\ § 281 ; \V. Leonhard, Hettiter und 
Amazonen, 93, 1 , compare 97 and Anhang vi. 270. 

2. Tliracian names in the Bosporus. M. Rostovtzeff, B.GJL. 63 (1917), 106. 

3. Find of Tcmir Gora. Cr?. 1870-1, p. xx, pL IV (the carved ivories and the bronze 
implements of this find are still unpublished). 

4. Find in the Taman peninsula, E. Prushevskaya, B.C. A, 63 (1917), 31 ff. 

5. Find in Bessarabia. jE, von Stern, M,A.R. 34, 1 ff. 

0. Find at Mikhalkovo in Galicia. K. Hadaczek, Zlote skarby Michalktmskk, Cracow, 
1904; Oesterreicfuscfte Jahreshefte, vi (1903), 115 ff. ; ix (1906), 32 ff. ; A Lebedyanakaya, 
B.CA.SI (1914), 29 ff. ; A. Spitsyn, ibid., 135 ff. ; Htimes, Urgeschichte der bildenden Kunst* 
29 and 610. Compare the fibula of Dalyi, M. Ebert, Oesterretchische Jahreshefte, xi (1908), 
260 ff. 

7. Massagetians, Minns, 111 ; Franke, * Zur Kenntnis der Turkvolkcr und Skythen 
Zentralasiens ', Abhandktngen der Berliner Akademie, 1904, 24 ff. 


8. Scythian graves of the sixth to fourth century. 
(a) Kuban district. Miring 222 (Kelermes), 223 (Voronezhskaya), 224 {Kostromskaya), 

227 (Ulski), cp. G. Borovka, * The bronze Stag of the Ulski aul\ B.A.M.C. 1921, 206 
(Seven Brothers) ; Maryinskaya and Elizavetinskaya, N. Veselovski, C.R. 1912, 1913-15; 
B.CJ1. 65 (1918), 1 fT. ; Karagodeuashkh, Minns, 216 ff. 

(6) Crimea and the Dnieper region. Golden Barrow near Simferopol, Veselovski, CR. 
1890, 4 if. ; RratovtzefJ, MAM. 37, 40; Tomakovka, Antiquities of Herodotean Scythia, 
pp. 62 ff., pi. XXVI; Rostovlzeff, I.L, -jSff. Shumeyko barrow, Khanenku, Les anti- 
quites de la region du Dnieper, iii, pi. XLV, 461 (on the excavations in this barrow in 
general, compare the introduction to vol. vi) ; Melgunov's barrow, Minns, 171 ft". 

(c) Hungarian group. Minns, 150; Geza Nagy, A Stskitkdk, Budapest, 1909, p. 57; 
Hampel, Fiikrerin der AlterlumsabteHung des Ungarischen N&liorudmustums, Budapest, 191 1, 
65, note 5 ; Homes, Urg. der bild. Kunst 2 , 428. 

(d) Vettersfelde. Minns, 236 ; A. Furtwangter, Kleine Schriften, i. 469 fF. 

(e) Caucasus. CJi. 1904, 131, figs. 239-43. 

9. Scythian dress, weapons, and implements. Minns, 50 ff, 

(a) Dress. Sarre and Herzfeld, framsche Febreliefs, p, 54; P. Stepanov, History of 
Russian Dress, I : Scythians, Petrograd, 191 5. 

(6) Headgear. M. Rostovtzeff and P. Stepanov, ' Greco-Scythian Headgear % B.CJl. 63 »/ 
(1917), 69 ff, G. Borovka, BJU^LC* 1921, 169 ff, A, H, Smith, Journal of Hellenic 
Studies* 1 91 7, 135. 

(cj Weapons. Sword. Rostovtzeff, MJI.R. 37, 5 1 ff. ; Stepanov, 1.1. Corslet. Rostov- 
tzeff, ibid., p. 62; A, Hagemann, (Jriechische Panzerung, I. Teil: Metallkamisch, Leip- 
zig and Berlin, Teubner, 1920. Bow, arrows, and bow-case. Bulanda, Bogen und Pfeil oet 
dm Volkem des AltertuJns,wien, 1913 (ignores the Russian material); P. Reinecke, iSetf- 
schrjftfiir Ethnologie, xxviii (1896), 6, 8 ft., 20 ff. ; II. Schmidt in R. Pumpetly, Explorations 
in TwAerfOT, Washington, 1908, voL i, p. ii, p. 183 ; A. M. Tallgren, Collection Tovostme t 
48 ft", ; II. Blumner, FtopvT&f, Berliner philologische Wochenschrift, 1917, 1 121 fL 

(d) Mirrors. Farmakovski. MJ1.R. 34, p. 33 ; F. Studniczka, ArcMalogischer Anzeiger, 
1919, 2 ff. 

(e) Cauldrons, M. Ebert, PrdhistorhcJte ZeitichifU iv (1912), 451 ; Zoltan v. Takacs, 
' Chinesische Kunst bei den Hunnen*, Ostasiatiscfie Zeitschrift, iv (1915), 174 IT. ; A. ML 
Tallgren, Collectim Tovostine, 46. 

(/) Horse-trappings. E. Pernice, Griechisches Pferdeeeschirr, Berlin, 1896 (56, Winckel- 
manns Programm); R. Zsdiille and R, Forrer, Die Pferdetrense in ihrer Farmentvncklung, 
Berlin, 1895 (ignores the South Russian material) ; Lefebvre des Noettes, Atmales du Service 
des Antiquttis de PEgypte, xi (191 1-12), 283 (especial ly Assyrian bridle, p), II). Oriental 
horse-trappings (no good study). Perrot et Chipiez, History if Art in Chaldaea and Assyria, 
ii. 357 ; compare 150, fig. 73. Iranian horse-trappings in North Syria. Woolley, Liverpool 
Annals of Archaeology, vii (1914-16). Very primitive horse-trappings in the animal style. 
Sumerian (?), Sir Hercules Read, Man, 1918, 1, pi. A. Another in the same style, the same, 
Man, 1920. Hittite horse-trappings. E r Meyer, Reich und Kullur der Cheititer, 55, fig. 45 ; 
Ausgrabungen in SendschirH, iv (191 1 ), p. 334 if-, fig- 245-c^ J Carchemish, pi. B 10, C. 

(g) Funeral canopies and chariots. Rostovtzeff, Ancient Decorative Wall-painting in 
South Russia, 47 fF. Oriental Standards. H. Prinz, AltorientaliscJie Symbclik, 97, compare 
Prahist&rische Zeitschtift, iv (1912), 16, and H. Schmidt, ibid, 28. 

10. Susa find. De Morgan, Delegation icientifiquc en Perse, Mint, viii. 29 ff ; Oxus find. 
Dalton, The Treasure of the Oxus, London, 1905. 

11. Caucasian openwork plaques and other bronze implements. Plaques and trinkets. 
Rossler, Zeitschtift fur Ethnologie, 1901, 87, fig. 21 b; 1902, 172, fig. 135 ft".; 189^ 398, 
pi. VIII ; de Morgan, Mission scientiftque au Caucase, fig. 116; Bayern, Zettsehtift per Etkm*- 
togie, 1R85, suppK, pi. IX. Swords and other weapons and impternents. Rossler, Zettstkrift 
fur Ethnologies Verhandtungen der artthropolegiscken (JeseUschaft, 1902, 147, fig. 42 ; ibid., 240, 
filZ- zc, &c, 

12. Scythian animal style (compare bibliography to chapter VIII). Minns, 266 ff.; 


Farmakovski, MJL.R. 34 (i9*4)t 32 ; Zoltan von Takaes, ' Zur Kunst der hunnischen 
Volker \ Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, v (1916), 138 ff. ; compare Arch. Krtes. xxxv (1915), 6.5 and 
an ; and Supka, ibid., chs. iii-v ; J.Strrygowski, Diebildende Kunst des Ostens t Leipzig, 
1916, 27 ; C. Schuchhardt, Altewopa in seiner Kultur und Siilentwicklung t Strassburg and 
Berlin, 1919, 325* cp. 332, fig. 101 : the same, * Tierornamentik in Sudrussland \ A.A., 
xxxv (1920), p. 51 ff\ cp. H. Schmidt, ibid., p. 42 ff. 

13. Contracted figures of animals. Difegaiion scientifique en Perse, xti. 21, N. 1173, 
fig. 24, to be compared with Scythian monuments, Bobrinskoy, Smeta t m. 20, barrow 346, 
pf. Vi, 1 and 3 ; Khanenko, Antsc/uite's de la rigion du Dnieper, m t pi, 45, N. 460 ; pi. 49, 
N. 529-31 j pL 57, T; pi. 61 , N. 539, 540, and 470. S. Reinach, Revue arch&tlogiqw, 
xxxvi (1900), 447, fig. 58 j and 448, figs. 60, 6i. 

14. Persian axes. Prototypes. Morgan, Delegation scientifique en Perse, vii, 78, pi. XVII , 
8 (axe) ; Harper, American Journal of Semitic Languages, xx, 266 fT. ; compare Handcock, 
Mesopotamian Archaeology, z§o, fig. 40 E (dagger); Handcock, Mesopotamian Archaeology, 
294, rig. 58 (contracted position of a lion on a Sutnerjan seal), Ilamadan axe in the British 
Museum. Greenwcll, Archaeologia, 58 (1902), 9, fig. it ; British Museum, A Guide to the 
Antiquities of the Bronze Age (1904), p. 128, fig. 124, Kinaman axe. Green well, Archaeo- 
logia, c8 (1902), 10, fig. 12. Bactrtan axe. Sir Hercules Read, ' A Bactrian Bronze Cere- 
monial Axe ", Man, 1914, no. 11, p. 17- Axe of Van. Greenwell, ibid., 8, fig. 10 (compare 
Handcock, Mesopotamian Archaeology, 254, pi. XXVII 1). 

15. The nationality of the Scythians. Mongolian theory. Minns, 97 (excellent biblio- 
graphy). Geza Nagy, A Sskithak, Budapest, 1909; H. Treidler, * Die Skythen und ihre 
Nachbarvolker ', Archw fur AntJtropologie (Wien), 1915, 280; G. Supka, Oesterreichische 
Monatsschriftenfur den Orient-, xli (191 5), 77 ff. 


1 . The myth of the Argonauts, the Odyssey, and South Russia. O. Maass, Die Irrfahrten 
des Odysseus, Programme, Guterslnh, 1915 % Drerup, Homer*, 124 ; P. Frieiflander, 
* Kritischc Untcrsuchungen zur Geschichte der Hcldensagc, I : Argonautensage,* Rheini" 
sches Museum, 69 (1914), 299; U. von Wilamowitz-MoeilendorfF, Die Mas und Homer, 
Berlin, 1^16,362. 

2. The Carians in South Russia. W. Leonhard, Paphlagonia, Reisen und Forschungen, 
Berlin, 1915, 323 ff. ; O. Maass, I.I., 8j Tomaschek, ' Kntik der alteren Nachrichten", 
Sitzungshenckte der Wiener Akademie, 1888 (106), 733 ; Hommel, Grundriss der Geographic 
u. Gescfdchte des alien Orients , 58 (§ 30), cp. C. Autran, Phhuciens, Paris, 1920. 

3. Sinope. W, Leaf, * The Commerce of Sinope ', Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxxvi 
(1916), 1 ff. 

4. Greek colonization. E. von Stern, articles quoted above to chapter I (with abundant 
bibliography, which I do not repeat). P. Klym, Die milesischen Kohnicn im Skythenlande 
bis sunt 3. mrchristlichen Jahrhundert, Czcrnowitz, Programme, 1914 ; E. von Stern, 
1 Bemerkungen zu Strabons Geographic der Taurischen Chersonesos *, Hermes, lit (191 7), 
1 ff. ; J. L. Myres, * Geography and Greek Colonization \ Proceedings of the Classical Asso- 
ciation, Jan. 1911 {viii), London, 1911, 62; A. Glynn Durham, The History of Miletus, 
London, 191 5, 15; A_ Gwynn, ' *ITie Oiaracter of Greek Colonization ', Journal of Hellenic 
Studies, 1918, 94 ff. ; F. Bi label, Die iunische Kolmdsation, Leipzig, 1920 {Philologus 
Suppl. xiv. 1), esp. pp, 19-28, 60 ff., 197. Greek colonies in Thrace. 0. Kazarow, 
1 Hellenism in Ancient Thrace and Macedonia ', Annual of the University of Sofia, xiii-xiv 
(19 19) (in Bulgarian). 

5. dbia. Farmakovski, c The Archaic Period in Russia*, MJLJl. 34 (1914). 16 ff. : 
Archaic Olbia. 

6. Bosphorus. History: latest treatment, E. von Stem, Hermes, 1. 179 ff., compare 
E. Bethe, " Athcn und der peloponnesische Krieg*, Neue Jahrbikher fur das hlasstsche 
Altertum, xx. 1, 73 ff. 


jr. The most ancient coinage of the Bosphoran group of Greek colonies. The Aeginetan 
standard of this coinage is explained by the commercial relations of the Bosphoran 
colonies, after the fall of Miletus but before the beginning of the Athenian hegemony, with 
Aegina and the Peloponnese, see Herod, vii, 147 ; P. Gardner, A History of Ancient 
Coinage, 700-300 B.c, Oxford, 191S. Note that Tens, the metropolis of Phanagoria, had 
the same Aegmetan standard, and that its chief god was Apollo (the inscription A1TOA 
on the earlier Bosph oran coins) . The similarity of type in the archaic coins of Panticapaeum 
and of Samos is explained by the dominant part played by Samos on the shores of the 
Propontis in the middle of the sixth century (the time of Polycrates), Gardner, LI., 192. 

8. Bosphoran tyrants. On the tyrannies in general : H. Swoboda, ' Zux Bcurteitung 
der griechisehen Tyrannis*, KUo t xii (1912), 341 ; Hampers, in Daremhcrg and Saglin, 
Dictwmuu're des Antiquites* v. 567 (both pay no attention to the Bosphoran tyranny). 

9. Cemetery of Panticapaeum. About the latest excavations, my article in tne Journal 
des Savants, 1920, quoted above. Analogous cemeteries are those of Mesambria and Abdera, 
excavated during the war, Kazarow, Aid. 1918, 4 ff., 50 ff. ; cp. Ath. Mitt, xxxvi (1911), 
308 ff ., and Amelung, A.A,, 1918, 140 ff. Harrows with chambers : best analogy in Thrace, 
see F. W\ Hasluck, * A Tholes Tomb at Kirk Kilisse \ Annual of the British School at 
Athens, xvii (1910-11), 76 (pi- XX), cf- xviii ; B. Filow, Volume in honour of Shishmanow, 
Sofia, 1919, 46 (in Bulgarian) : other barrows with vaulted chambers in my Ancient 
Decorative Painting in South Russia, passim* 

10. Cemetery at Nymphaeum. Minns, 561. Contents of some graves of this cemetery 
in the Ashmolean; E. A. Gmdner, JournalofHelknk Studies,v (188^69 (Atlas, pi. XL VI 1). 
Graves 1, II, and IV certainly belong to the fifth century B.C. (grave IV is dated by 
red-figured vases). New data on these graves and a new treatment of the whole cemetery 
will be given in my forthcoming book, Studies in the History of Scythia and die Bosphorus, 
vol. i ; ibid., description of the cemeteries of other Greek cities in the Bosphoran state ; 
mean while, see Minns, passim, cp. my article in the Journal des Savants, 1920, 

j 1. Cemeteries of Olbia and the neighbouring Greco-Scythian towns. Farmakovski, 
M^.R. 34. 16 ff., cf. Journal des Savants, 1930 : M. Ebert, Prdkistorische Zeitschrift, iii, 
z$z and v. 1 ff. ; von Stern, Hermes, I. 165 ff. Remains of Greco-Scythian towns. 
GoszMewic2, * The " Gorodishche " on the lower Dnieper ', B.CA. 47 (1913), 117 ; Ebert, 
Prahistorische Zeitschrift, v (1913), 81 ff. 

12. Gold coinage in the Bosphorus. The precise date of the introduction of gold 
coinage in the Bosphoran state, and the economic and political reasons for the step, are 
still conjectural. P. Gardner, ,4 History of Ancient Coinage, Oxford, 1918, 393 ff., pointed 
out that -the phenomenon is not peculiar to Bosphonis but common to most of the leading 
commercial states of Greece ; Athens, to his mind, took the lead in the whole movement. 
Hence the Athenian standard of the Panticapaean gold. I can hardly agree with this 
opinion. My own view is that the rise of gold coinage in Greece was due to the fall of the 
Athenian commercial hegemony and the increasing commercial and political influence 
of Persia. It is possible that Panticapaeum, being independent of Persia t was the first 
to adopt gold coinage. As its chief market was Athens, Panticapaeum adopted the 
Athenian standard. Athens followed Panticapaeum, being anxious to keep her lead in 
the Pontic trade. Cyztcus and Lampsacus and some other cities attempted to oust the 
Panticapaean coinage by imitating its types. I intend to treat these matters more fully 
in a special article. 


I. The Persians and the Scythians, 
(a) Darius's expedition. Minns, 1 16-17. J. V. Prasek, Geschichte der Meier und Perser t 
ii. 76 and 105 ; the same, Dareios, i (1914) (Der alte Orient, 14, 4), 21 ff, ; Obst, Ktio,ix. 
(1909), 413 ff. ; Wittneben, Zeitschrift fur Oesterr, Gymnasien, Ixvi (1912), 557 ff- » 
Lenschau, Bursian's Jahresherkhte d. Klass. Alt., 178 (1919), "9 ff- 


(6) Darius and the Saciana (inscription of Naksh-i-Rustam). Sarre and I lerzfeld , Iranische 
Felsreliefs(i<)io),cbap&. II and III, and supplement, p. 251 ; F.H. Weis$bach,Berkkted.satfi- 
mchen Geselkchaft ', 191 o (62), i, and Abhandlungeri der K. S&chsischen Geseltschaft, Phil.-hist. 
KL, xxix (1911), Die Keih'nschriften am Grabe des Darius Hystaspes ; the same. Die Keitin- 
schiften der Achameniden, V order asiatische Bibliothek, Leipzig, 191 1. The mention of the 
over-sea Sacians and the Sacians in the supplement to the inscription of Bisutun (Weissbach, 
Die Keilinschriften der Achameniden, p. 73, § 74) is usually (lierzfeld, 198 ; Prasck, ii. 93) 
taken as referring to the expedition of Darius in South Russia, compare I lofFmann-K-utschke, 
Recueil des travaux, 1908, 140. 

(c) On the ethnographical questions. E. Meyer, Geschichte des AHertums, L 2 3 , § 578, 
p. 905 ff. 

2. The Kingdom of the Odrysians* P. Foucart, * Lea Atheniens dans le Chersonese 
dc Thrace au I V*s., Mem. de VAcad.d. Inscr,, xxxviii, 1 (1909), 80 fF.; J, Kazarow, Beitrage 
zur Kulturgeschichte der Thraker, Sarajevo, 191 6 ; the same, Hellenism in ancient Thracia 
and Mttcedon, Annual of the University of Sofia, xiii-xiv (1920) (in Bulgarian) ; Lenschau, 
(Burstan's) Jahresb. des Kl. Alterl. 178 f 1919), 182 ff. 

3. Scythian objects in Thracian tumuli. 6. Filow, ' Denkmaler der thrakischen Kunst \ 
Mitteihtngen des Deutschen Archanlogischen Insiituts, Romische Ahteilung, xxxii (19*7)1 J ff-i 
compare G. Kazarow, BeitrSgezur Kulturgeschichte der Thraker, Sarajevo, 1916 (Zur Kunde 
der Balkanhalhinsel, II, QueLen u, Forschungen), 87, 94 ff. 

4. The Celts in the Balkan peninsula. Minns, 126 ; Niese in Paujy-Wissowa-Krolt, 
R.E,vi\ t 61 8, compare Rrandis, ibid., 522 ; G. Kazarow, ' Celts in TTiracia and Macedonia ', 
Transections of the Bulgarian Academy, xviii (1919). Bastarnae. A. Bauer, ' Die Her- 
kunft der Bastarner *, Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie, 185, z, Wien 191 8, compare 
L. Schmidt, Berliner phiblogische Wochenuhrift, 1919, 106. 

5. On the remains of the fortified cities of the native population in the regions of 
the Dnieper, the Bug, the Dniester, and the Don (gorodishene's), Minns, 147 ff., 175 ; 
Spitsyn, Scythia and Hallstatt \ Miscellany in honour of Count A. Bobrinskoy (excavations 
in the gorodisbche of Nemirov in Podolia), St. Petersburg, 191 1 ; the same, B CA, 65 
(1918), 87 ff. 

6. Barrow's of the seventh to fourth century on the Middle Dnieper. Archaeological 
material. Count A. Bobrinskoy, Barrows and chance Archaeological Finds about the Totem 
of SmSla, vol. i (1887), ii (1894), iii (1902). Samokvasov, The Grams of the Russian Land, 
Moscow, 1908 ; General Brandenburg, Reports on his own excavations, Petersburg, 1908; 
B. and V. Khanenko, Antiquities of me Region of the Dnieper Basin, vols, i, ii, Hi, and vi ; 
Minns, 175. Attempts at classification. V. Chvojka, The Ancient Dwellers on the Middle 
Dnieper, Kiev, 1913 ; A, Spitsyn, B.CA. 65 (19 1 8), 87 ff,, ' The Barrows of the " ploughmen " 
Scythians.' M. Rostovtzeff, Studies of t)ie History of Scythia and the Bosphonis, 1, p. iii. 

7. Barrows of the fourth to third century b. c. in the Dnieper region. 

(«) Lower Dnieper. Minns, T52--71 (Lower Dnieper and the Government of Taurida) ; 
for the Deev barrow, compare M. Rostovtzeff, B,C,A. 63 {191 2), 78. Later excavations : 
Solokha, N. Veselosvki, CM, 1912 and 1913-19 (with bibliography) ; S. Polovtsov, Revue 
archeologique, 1914; Svoronos, * Explication des tresors de fa tombe royale de Solokha', 
Journal international d'archiologie numismatique, xvii (191 5), 3 ff. (cf. S. Reinach, Revue 
ij ' archJolagique, 1916, 310; M. Rostovtzeff, 'learned Fantasies', B,C,A. 65 (191 8), jz), 
Rossbaeh , Berliner philologische Wochensckrift ', 19 14, 1311- Chcrnaya Dolina . N . Makarenko, 
Hermes (Russian), 1916, 267. Other barrows excavated after 191 1 . M. Rostovtzeff, Journal 
des Savants, 1920. 

(b) Middle Dnieper. Darievka and Ryzhanovka, Minns, 177-80, compare Samokvasov, 
Graves of the Russian Land, 71; Government of Poltava, Minns, 180 ff-, compare 
Samokvasov, 1.1.; Novoselki (government of Kiev, district of Lipovets), A. Bydlovski, 
Svyatovit, 1904 (v), 59 ff. ; Rostovtzeff, B.CJL. 63, 81, 1. 

8. Date of this group. E. von Stern, Hermes,!, (1915), 192 ff. ; cf, MAM. 34 (1914). 91 , 
and B.C. A. 58. 


9. Greco-Scythian settlements. Goszkiewiez, B.CJk. 47, 117; Rbert, Prahtstorische 
Zeitichrift f v,$t t 

10. Scythian religion. M. Rostovtzeff, ' The Idea of Royal Power in Scythia and on the 
Bosphorus *, B.CA. 49, and addenda ibid.; the same, * Irantsm and Ionism', London 
Historical Congress , 1913 ", the same, Revue des Etudes Grecques, 1 921 (jubilee volume). 
Thracian engraved ring. B. Filow, Romische Mitteihmgen t 1917 (xxxii), 4, fig. 1 ; another 
almost identical ring found in Adrianople and now in the Louvre, not quoted by Filow, 
Le Mus£e t iii. 332, fig. 18 ; Rostovtzeff, Ancient Decorative Painting in South Russia, 516, fig. 
On Herakles as parent of the Scythian tribes. lies. Cat.; Oxy. Pap. xi, 1358, 2, 15-19; 
Th. Remach, Revue des Etudes Grecques, 1915 (xxix), 120. Enareans. W. R. HaJliday, ' A 
Note on the fhfjX«ta vavtros of the Scythians ', Annual of the British School at Athens, 
xvii. 95. The sacred oath. Minns, 203, fig. 98 = A,B.C. xxxii, 10, and 197 > fig. 90 = A. B.C. 
xxxii. 1. 

11. The dominant tribe among the Scythians. Th. Reinach, Revue des Etudes Grecques , 
1916 (xxix), ti. 

12. Economic life. 'SidSflai aporTJpen and yitopyoij Vogel in * Festschrift fiir Eduard 
Hahn * , Studien u. Forschunsen tut Menschen- und Volkerkunde, herausgegehen von G. Buschan , 
Stuttgart, 1917, cf. H. Philipp, Berliner philohgische Wochenschrift, 1919* p, 386 ff. 

13. Vases with scenes from life in a Scythian camp. M, Rostovtzeff, M.A.R. 34 (1914), 

14. Panticapaean artistic school. M. Rostovtzeff, B.C.A. 65, 72 if. Compare 
e.g. the scenes on the silver vases from Solokha (pi. XX, I, 2) with the monuments 
analysed by P. Perdrizetj ' Venatio Alexandri ', Jourtt. of Hell. St, xix (1899), p. 273 ff., 
pi. XI and Winter, Der Alexandersarhophag von Sidon, 1912. 


1. Sarmatians and Sauromatians, My article in Revue des Etudes Grecques, 32 
( 1 921), p- 470. 

2. Sarmatians and Alans, Mullenhoff, Deutsche Attertumskunde, iii, passtm, chap. 102 ff. ; 
Minns, 117 ff. ; \V. Tomaschek, art. Alani in Pauly-Wissowa, R.E. ; J. Kulakovski, The Alans 
according to the Testimonies of Classical and Byzantine Writers, Kiev, 1899. E. Taubler, 
' Zur Geschichte der Alanen*, Klio, be (1909), 14 ff. ; M* Rostovtzeff, History of Decorative 
Painting in South Russia, 340 IT, Their dress and weapons. Rostovtzeff; ibid. 326 ft,; 
ibid., the extant ancient monuments representing Sarmatians : add to this list a figure of 
a Sarmatian horseman — a perfect counterpart of the Sarmato-Bosphoran horsemen in 
the Panticapaean painted tombs (pi. XXIX) — carved no a rock on the banks of the river 
Yenissei in Siberia : often published, e. g Inscriptions de t Yenissei, Helsingfors, 1889. 
cp. B. Laufer, Chinese Clay Figures, i, Chicago, 1914, 222, He.. 35. The Yenissei carvings 
testify to the lasting occupation of a large part of Western and Central Siberia by the 
Sartmrian tribes. Sarmato- Roman soldiers wearing Sarins tian arms (note especially 
the conical helmet) are often represented on late Roman and early Byzantine historical 
reliefs. Besides the arch of Galerius {a. D. 297 : lately discussed by O. Wulff, Altchrtst* 
liche u. Byzantinische Kunst, i (191 4), p* 160 ff., compare E. Hebrard, Bull, de Corr. IleE., 
xliv (1920), 5 ff., on the new excavations conducted during the war), I would mention 
a wooden capital from Alexandria, of the fifth to sixth century a.d., which represents 
a besieged city (O. Wulff, K6n. Mug. Berlin, Besthr. der Bildwerke der christl. Epoche, 
iii, AlUhrisiKche etc. Bildwerke, i (1909), no. 243, p. 80 ff., pi. VI), and the bronze plaque 
from the throne (?) of the Lombard King Agilulr (a.d. 590-616) found at Val di Nievole in 
Tuscany (O. Rossbach, Neuejfahrb, f. kl. Altertum, raw (1913), 269 ff,), 

3. Scythians in the Dobrudzha. J. Weiss, * Die Dobrudscna im Altertum ' (Zur Kunde 
der Ratkanhalbinsel, II, QueUen und Forsthungeny 12). Coins of Scythian kings of the Do- 
brudzha kingdom. J. Weiss, 1.1., cf. M. Soutzo in the Transactions of the Rumanian 

. Academy, 1916, and A. Oreshmkov in Moscow Numismatic Miscellany, iii (1916). 



4. The kingdom of Skiluros in the Crimea. Minns, 119 ; Stern* Hermes, !., 206, 

5. Excavations in the region of Orenburg. M. Rostovtzeff, M.A.R. 37. 

6. Excavations near Tanab. Minns, 567. Sarmatians near Tanais, Diod, ii, 43, 

7. Excavations near Stavropol (Kazinskoe Farm). Pridik, M.A.R. 34, 107 ff. 

8. Excavations of Veselovski in the Kuban region. N. Veselovski, * Barrows of the 
Kuban district in the time of Roman dominion in the Northern Caucasus \ Bulletin of the 
Xltth Archaeological Congress, Kharkov. 1902 ; Minns, 232, note 4. The last important 
find on the Kuban was made accidentally in 1911 and acquired by the Archaeological 
Commission. It belongs to the group of the earlier Sarmatian graves (second to first 
century B. cv-fxret century A. d.) and contains many interesting objects, e. g. two gold 
mountings of glass or horn rhyta, one richly adorned with coloured stones and transparent 
glass, the other with embossed figures in the style of the silver phalarae mentioned below. 
Published by Farmakovski, A, A., 191 2, 323 ff. Finds in Akhtanizovka and Siverskaya. 
Spitsyn, BJU.A. 29, 19 ff. Artyukhov'e farm and Anapa. Minns, 430 ff. ; GJi. t 1882-3. 
Buerova Mogila C.R. 1 870-1 871, ixff. ; 1882-1888, lxxxii ; M^l.R., 37, 43. Many finds 
of the same type have been made in Central Caucasus, especially in the cemeteries of 
Kambulta, Kamunta, Katcha, &c.,. see Tolstoy and Kondakov, Russian Antiquities, 463 ff. 
These finds of the Sarmatian epoch must not be confounded, as in the book of Tolstoy and 
Kondakov, with the prehistoric grades of the Koban and with prehistoric burials in the 
cemeteries enumerated above. The Caucasus finds in general need careful revision and 
investigation. A well dated Caucasian cemetery {1st to 2nd century a.d.) showing strong 
Sarmatian influence is that of Bori in the province of Kutais, recently published by E, Pridik 
in M.AM., 34. 

0. Novocherkassk, Tolstoy and Kondakov, Antiquites de la Russie meridionale, 488 ff. ; 
Ch. de Linas, Origines de Forfevrerie cloisotme'e, vol. ii ; A. Odobesco, Le tresor de Petrossa, 
passim; Minns, 235. Other finds on the Don. MiguHnskaya, B.CJl. 63, 106; Chutek, 
Tolstoy and Kondakov, Ant., 496 ff. 

10. Silver phalarae from South Russia. Spitsyn, B.C.A. 29, 19 ff.; A. Odobesco, 
Le tresor de Petrossa, i, p. 293, fig. 116, cf. p. 513, fig. 217. The same technique, style 
and the same selection of figures on certain gold-mountings of glass, wood, or horn rhyta 
are found on the Kuban and the Don. Many such are forged, but some are certainly 
genuine, e. g. A.A. 1912, p. 326, fig. 4, which is a good representative of the whole class. 
The phalara from Vozdvizhenskaya, C.R. 1899, 43, fig. 70, cf. 1896, 58, fig. 284. The 
cauldron of Gundestrup, the Raermond phalara, and the plaques of Pontus {?), S. Reinach, 
Revue celtique, xxv {1904), 211 ; Cuttes. Mythes et ReHgions, i. 282 ; F. Drexel, ' Ueber 
den Silberkessel von Cundestrup \ Jahrbuch des Beutscken Archaologischen Instituts, xxx 
(1915), 1 ff. Gilt silver phalarae, with floral patterns, inset with transparent glass, found 
in horse-graves on the Vasyurinskaya Gora in the Taman peninsula. Rostovtzeff, History 
of Decorative Painting in South Russia, p. 41, n. z, and p. 510. 

11. Silver phalarae of the South Russian type in Bulgaria, Bulletin de la Socie'te' 
archevfogique bulgare, vii (1919-1920), p. 147 ff., figs. 106 and 107, 

12. Tsvetna, C.R, 1896, 89 and 210. 

13. Contzesti. The important find of Contzesti (see AJB.C+* Fr* ed., p. 91, data, 
gathered by Odobesco, about the grave where the objects were found), which contained two 
sih/er vases {AJi.C, pi. XXXIX-XLII) and three sticks, covered with silver, in the form 
of thyrsi (AM.C, xxvii. 1, 2, erroneously attributed to Kul-Oba, but belonging to the find 
of Contzesti, as is shown by documents preserved in the Hermitage), which probably formed 
the supports of a funerary canopy, certainly belongs to the Sarmatian epoch, cf . the rhyton 
of Poroina (Odobesco^ Le trisor de Petrossa, i, p. 498, fig. 205) and the rhyton of kerch 
(A. B.C. xxxvL i, z, cp. Winter, Oesterr. Jahreshefte v (1902), 112 ff.), also the find of 
Fetroasa. On the stiver amphora of Contzesti , Drexel, Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archaologischen 
Instituts, xxx ^1915), Z02. All these monuments present the same technique as the silver 
phalarae mentioned above. It is a pity that the crown of Contzesti, of gold inset with 
precious stones, has disappeared. 


14. Siberia. N. C. Witsen, Noord en Oost TarUuye, 1785 (3rd ed.) ; W. Radloff, 
MAM. 3. 5. 1$ , 27* Tolstoy and Kondakov, Antimiites t 379 ft ; Ch. de Lmas, Originet de 
Forfevrerie dotsonnee f vol. 11 \ Minns, 271 ff. The whole find ought to be republished 
in good reproductions, together with Witsen's drawings, and with the documents about 
the discovery, and the eighteenth-century drawings, preserved in the archives of the 
Russian Academy of Science. 

15. Characteristic objects found in the graves of Kuban. 

(a) Glass vases imitating metal vases. Zubov's farm, B.CA. i. 96, fig. 9 (first barrow) ; 
101, fig. 24 (second barrow); Akhtanizovka, CM., 1900, 107, fig. 208; Siverskayai 
Spitayn, B.CA. 29, 19 ff. ; Vozdvizhenskaya, CJL, 1899, 45, fig. 73 ; Yaroslavskaya, 
CM., 1896, 56, fig. 218 ; Tifli&skaya, CM., 1902, 66, fig. 135 ; Armavir, CM., 1902, 87, 
fig. 194. This group of vases, some of which are adorned with gold mountings inset 
with precious stones (c. g. the vases of Siverskaya ; the rhyton from the Kuban, A A. 
1 91 2, 323 ff., figs. 1,2; another, ibid., p. 325, fig. 3 ; the rhyton from the Besleneevskaya 
stanitsa ; Minns, p. 58, fig. 11, Sec), is indeed unique. It is the first attempt of the Greeks 
to replace metal, stone and clay vases by glass vases, the glass used being not coloured 
but transparent, like crystal, though slightly opaque. The whole class has never been 
studied seriously, as regards either technique or style. As far as I have studied the vases 
myself I suppose that they were either cast in moulds and afterwards polished, or hewn 
out of solid blocks of cast glass. The latter technique prevailed in China after glass began 
to be manufactured there in the fifth century A* n. (see B. Laufer, The Beginnings of 
Porcelain in China, Chicago, 19 17, pj. 140 ff.). The models used by the Chinese were 
undoubtedly vases of the kind described above, which were manufactured, probably in 
Alexandria, for the special purpose of export to the East — South Russia, China, India, 
tt seems that the Oriental peoples were very fond of such vases, especially if set in gold 
mountings. One of the earliest monuments of this kind found in the Far East is the large 
vase of opaque glass, adorned with medallions engraved with the head of Athena, now in 
the Royal Ontario Museum at Toronto (second century B.C. r). In the West these vases 
were not popular and were soon replaced by blown glass and various kinds of coloured 
glass. See Kisa, Das Gias im Alter lume (1908), ii, p. 378 ; Morin-Jean, Daremberg et 
Saglio, Diet, v, 934-949. 

(A) Clay vases m the form of animals and human heads. CM,, 1902, 73, fig. 157 ; 67, 
fig* 136? 72, fig* 152 (all from Tiflisskaya stanitsa); Ladozhskaya, CM., 1002, 87, fig. 162, 
cf. Ust-Labmskaya* CM., 1902, 81 , fig. 174. On this group of late Hellenistic and early 
Roman vases, see Farmakovski in Miscellany in honour of Countess P, Cvarov, Moscow, 
1916,311 ff. (in Russian). 

(c) Brooches. Artyukhov's farm, CM., 1880, Atlas, pi. II, 3. Akhtanizovka, CM,, 1900, 
107, fig. 111, Titorovsfcaya, AM.C. xxiv. to. Zubov's farm, B.CA. 1, pi. II and fig. 1. 
Vozdvizhenskaya, CM., 1899, 44, fig. 68. Gevrnanov's settlement, CM., 1900, 44, fig. 103. 
Ekaterinodar, CM., 1899, 131. fig. 258. Lsaheio near Kutais (Caucasus), MAM. 34, 
p. 109, pi. I, 1, 2. All ornamented with geometric patterns in filigree and embossed 
work. Brooches ornamented with figures of animals inset with coloured stones. Kurd- 
zhips, CM., 1&96, 64, figs, 305 and 306 ; 1895, 62, fig. 296 ; 152, figs. 501 a and 502. 
Zubov's farm, B.CA. i. 101, fig, 20. Tiflisskaya, CM., 1902, 67, fig. 139. Ladozhskaya, 
ibid. 77, fig. 161 . Ibid. 78, fig. 1 64. Ust-Labinskaya, CM., 1902, 82, fig 177 (two griffins) ; 
cf. Kondakov and Tolstoy, Antiquitis, 486, fig. 440, and the Siberian plaque, Odobesco, 
Le trisor de Petrossa, 511 , fig. 215. The earliest brooches of this kind were found in graves 
of the third to first century B.C.— at Kurdzhips, Akhtanizovka and Artyukhov's farm. The 
type is therefore a creation of the Hellenistic epoch. 

(d) Tendril fibulae. Tifiisskaya, CM> t 1900, 103, fig. 180. Timoshevskaya, CM., 1894, 
38, fig. 41. Anapa, CM., 1894, 85. Vodyanoe (government of Taurida), CM., 1902, 
133. In form of animals and geometric figures. Ust-Labinskava, CM., 1899, 17, fig. 87 ; 
1902, 81, fig. 175, &c. Kurdzhips, CM., 1896, 155, % ci 3 , cf. Martin, Korigeiige Vttterhtts 
Historisk och Antiquarisk Akademiens Martadshtad, t894,Bikang(Fibutorock smjorfr&n Kertch). 

*353 Hh 


On the type of fibula for which the Germans use the term * Fibula mit umgeschlagenem 
Fusse ' and which was generally used by the Goths, ace Ebert's articles quoted in note 15. 
I lay stress on the fact that many of the tendril fibulae found on the Kuban, some of 
which belong to the first century A. D„ present all the peculiarities of the fibula ' mit 
umgcschlagcnern Fusse \ 

(e\ Cauldrons (Asiatic) with family devices . CM. , 1 899, fig. 96 , cf . Vcwd vizhenskaya, ibid . 
43, figs. 77 and 78 ; Zubov's farm, B.CA. j , fig. 7 ; Ust-Labinskaya, C.R., 1002, 83, fig. 183* 

(/) Gold bottles inset with stones. Ust-Labinskaya, CM., 1902, 83, fig. 184 ; Olbia, 
CM., 1868, Atlas, pi. 1, 10 j and A. A. xxix (1914), p. 256, fig. 79. 

(g) Openwork. Hellenistic and early Roman period : Besleneevskaya stanitsa, Minns, 
p. 58, fig. 11 (mounting of a rhyton) ; Kuban region, A A., 1912, p. 325, fig. 3 (the same) ; 
Bori (Caucasus), MAM. 34, p. 96, i t 2, pi. I, 8,0, ; cp. p. 98, 14, pi. 1, 6 ; Novocherkassk, 
Minns, p. 234, fig. 139 (tore), compare Akhtanizovka, Minns, p. 215* fig. 118 and the 
figures on the Bulgarian phalarae quoted above no. 11 ; to a later period belongs the vase 
of violet glass in a silver openwork mounting found in the Caucasus, CM, t 1872, 144, 
Atlas, pi, 11,1-3; Kisa t Das Glas, figs. 208 and 208 a (pp. 430, 431) and p. 602 ff., where 
other examples of the same kind are given from Northern Europe. Openwork belt-plaques 
of the early Roman Empire. Kazanskaya stanitsa, CM., 1 901, 76, fig. 153. 

(A) Gold garment plaques. Seep. 131, hg. 17, with indication of proveniences. Besides 
the plaques found in datable paves, large sets of identical plaques, all bought in South 
Russia, mostly at Kerch, are preserved in various museums : the Louvre (a set bought 
in 1889, Inv. MNC 1120 and another bought in 1920 with the Messaksudi collection) ; the 
Metropolitan Museum at New York (some hundreds of plaques bought at Kerch)* 

(*) Mirrors. MAM. 37, 72 ; Zubuv*s farm, B.CA. 1, 102, fig. 25 ; Armavir! CM., 1903, 
63, fig. 102- 

(j) Swords of the type used in Kerch. Novokorsunskaya stanitsa, CM., 1902, 135, 
figs. 240 a and 240 b ; MAM. 37, 51. 

16. Archaeological evidence for the Dnieper region in die Roman period. Reinecke, 
Maimer Ze^sdxrift, 1906 (i), 42 ff. ; Ebert, Prdhistorische Zeitsehrift, v (1913), 80 ; the same, 
Balthihe Studien zur Atchaologie unci Gesddchte, Berlin, 1914, 85 ; T. Arne, Oldtiden, 1918, 
207 ff. ; Det Store Svitgod, Stockholm, 1917, p. 7ff. ; Rostovtzeff, Studies, p. iii. 


/ 1. History of the Bosphorus in the first century ». c. M. Rostovtzeff, * Caesar and the 

South of Russia \ Journal of Roman Studies, 191 7, 27 ff. ; ' Queen Dynamis of Bosphorus \ 
Journal cf Hellenic Studies, xxxix (1919), 88. 

2. History of the Bosphorus during the Roman Empire. My articles quoted by Stern, 
Hermes, \., 200, note 1 ; cf. * Pontus, Bithynia, and the Bosphorus % Annual of the British 
School at Athens ; xxii. Military occupation of Olbia by the Romans, B.CA. 58, 1 ff. 
Military occupation of Armenia, B.CA. 32, 1 ff., and Christian Orient (in Russian), iii. 

3. Political, social, and economic conditions in the Bosphorus during the first to third 
centuries a. d. Minns, 612 ff. Stern, Hermes, 1. (1915), 2a I ff. (he quotes alt my articles on 
this subject). Cf. K. J. Neumann, * Romische Klientelstaaten\ Histarische ZeUsdtrift, 1917, 
1 ff. Cm the titles <fn\&Kat<rap and (^tXcpat^atos^ R. Munsterberg, Jahreshefte des Oester- 
reichhehen Institutes, xviii (191 3), Beiblatt, 318. 

4^, On the religious conditions see my articles : ' The Idea of Kindy Power in Scythia 
and on the Bosphorus \ B.CA. 49 ; " Iranism and Ionism \ Historical Congress, London, 
1913 ; and ' Ancient Decorative Painting in South Russia *, passim, especially the chapter 
on the late Panticapaean painted tombs ; compare my article on the Great Goddess m 
Rev, d. Et. Gr., 1921. On the names of the Great Goddess and her consort — Astara and 
Sanerges — see the note of Hiller von Gaertringen and E. von Stern to Dittenberger, 
Sylloge *, no. 216. Von Stern is inclined to compare these names rather with the Thracian 
names "ktrrat, 5<inj, 'Epyuvs than with the Semitic Astarte and the Hittite (?) San daft. 


t am not sure that the name Sandas for the God of Tarsus is not also of Thrarian origin. 
The fantastic clay figurines which are regularly found in Panticapaean graves of the first 
and second century a. d, (see e.g. A.A., 1914, 345, fig. 29; 1913, 193 n\, figs. 32, 33: 
Minns, pp. 369, 370, fig. 268) are puzzling. They are certainly not toys : their religious 
significance is beyond doubt. The best analogy is furnished by Chinese clay figures of 
the Han dynastyJ'B. Laufer, Art and Archaeology, vi (1917), p. 300), which also have 
movable limbs. Their apotropacic character is indicated by their being ithyphallic and 
playing musical instruments or clashing their swords and shields. Analogous figures 
arc common in the paintings of later Panticapaean graves, mostly of the second and third 
centuries A. d. 

e. Sarmatian system of writing, Bkorpil, B.C.A., 37, 23 ff . ; Minns, pp. 316-318, 
Similar signs on the tiaras of Sassantan Kings (coins and engraved stones). On the 
Hittite ' hieroglyphs \ A. E. Cowley, The Hittites, London, 1920. Note that the same 
signs appear both at Panticapaeum in the second to third century a. d. and on the Kuban 
(cauldrons — eh. vi, no. 15 (e) ; gold bottles — ibid., no. 15 (f)) J compare the mark on the 
rump of the horse of the Sarmatian horseman on the Yenissei (ch. vi, no. 2), 

6. Relations between Panticapaeutn and the cities on the southern shore of the 
Black Sea. 1 have collected the evidence in my articles on Roman Olbia. New evidence 
la furnished by two inscriptions : one, from Sinopc, republished by Th. Reinach, Rev, 
arch., 1916, p. 345. no. 7, is the funeral inscription of Julius Callinicus a laikXijpoy, 
compare Jos. P.E. iv. 72, from Chersonesua mentioning a certain T. KtUoy Evrvx**"*^ 
vwnhapos Stvwmvs (even if Eutychianus assumed the predicate Namkapos as a second 
cognomen it is sufficient evidence for his profession) j the second is the inscription of 
Zela (Cumont, Stud. Pontica, ui (1910), 246, no. 273, compare Th Reinach, Rev. arch., 
1920, p. 185 ff.) ; the deceased woman Chelidon is a jVtaeotian and her husband bore 
the name of flu'irros, common in the form flen-iKo*, &c., in the Bosphorus. 

7. The polychrome style in Panticapaeum. On the sarcophagi with incrustations : 
Rostovtzeff, Ancient Decorative Painting in South Russia, p. 213. The group of graves 
belonging to the family of Rhescuporis II. Minns, p. 434; Skorpil, BX2.A. 37, pp. 231!. 
The grave of 191 o was discovered in the same region as the first three 1 the diadem inset 
with garnets, Farmakovski, Archaologischer Anseiger, 1911, 198, and fig. 9 on p. 202. 
A better reproduction : RostovtzefT, Ancient Decorative Painting in South Russia , p. 575, 
%-97i cf. p. 319. 


1. Polychrome style in jewellery, Minns, p. 282, no. 2; E. von Stern, Sitzungs- 
berkhte der Prussia, xxi (1900), 243 n% pi. XXIV ; idem, Hermes, I (1915), 213 ; Reineckc, 
Mainxer Zeitsehrift, i {1906), 47, no. 30 j S. Reinach , Revue archeologique, 1000 (xxxvi) , 441 fL ; 
idem, ibid., 1905, 309 ff. ; M. Ebcrt, ' Die Wolfsheimer Platte und die Goldschale des 
Khosrau ',BaItische Studien zur Archaedogie und Gesdnchtc, Berlin, 1914, £7 ff. ; A. Gotze, 
' Gothische Schnallen ' {Germanische Funde aus der V6lkerwandtrungszett\ Berlin , $*d. ; 
idem, Mannus, i (1909), 122 ff. ; idem, Kaiserliche Museen xu Berlin, Pruh-germamsehe 
Kunst, SonderaussteUung ostgotltischer Altertumer der Valkertoanderungszeit aus Sudrusskmd, 
Berlin, 1915 (2. Aufi.) ; E. Brenner, Der Stand der Forschung iiher die Ksdtur der Mero- 
mngerzeii, 2526*.; 'Die Suo^ussisch-doriaulandische Germanenkultur ', Kaiseriiches 
Arihaotogisches Tnstitut i VI L Bericht der romisch-germanischen Kammunon, Frankfurt a. M,, 
191 5 ; R. Zahn, Amtlicke Berkhte aus den konigUchen Museen, xxxviii (1916), no. 1, iff.; 
A- Rosenberg, Manatshefte jur Kunstwtssensckqft, ix (1916) : J. Strzygowski, Altai, Iran und 
Volkerwartderungy Leipzig, «9*7, 274 <T. ; E. Male, Etudes sur Vart aUemand, Revue de Paris, 
11917, cf. E. Male, Studien uber die deutsche Kunst, herausgegeben mit Entgegniaigm von .. . 
A. Gotze . . . Gcza Supka , . . Leipzig, 1917 ; G. Kossinna, Altgermantsehc KuJturftohe, 
Jena, iqiq. 

2. * Gothic ' find of 1004 in Kerch, and later finds in South Russia. Minns, p. 386, 

no. 1 , a l Brenner, 1. 1. 



■t The treasure of Petroasa. A. Odobeacc. Le tresor de Petrossa, t. i,Pans. 1889-1 igoo; 
t h\ t8c6 ; t iii, 1900 ; Geza Supka, Arch. Ertesiio, 1914, 29 ; Diomsie Olmescu, Gothtsck- 
SkytkisSte Goldschmiedekunst m Daeien u. Pannmien, Jahrbuch des Bukomna Landes- 

M "^!%U£*br£J* graves. W, KubifcKhek, ' K.-K. Zentral-Kommission fiir Kunst 
und Historische Denkmaler \ Jahrbuch fiir AHerhtmswissenschaft, v (1911), 32 «• i Brenner, 

c Finds in Africa. Find of Carthage (Koudiat Zateur, unpublished). Delattrc, CompU 
rendu de TAcad&nie des Inscriptions, 1916, 14 ff. ; Merlin, Bulletin archMogique du Comit*, 
i Q i6, p. ccxiii ; finds of Thuburbo Majlis (unpublished) : the first Compte rendu derAm- 
dmie des Inscriptions^ 1912, pp. 35« «- * *« second (of TO20K still unmentioned ; cf. other 
finds Bull arcldu Com., 189* pi. XV-XVI1 ; Doublet and Gauckler Mas. de Cons^ttm^ 
p. u : Jfetiertt arcMologique du Comiti, 1902, p. 444; Besnier and Blanche^ LoUectwn 
Forges, pp. 66 ff. J de Baye, 2M&*ot des Antiquatres de France* 1914, 212 ff. ITwse refer- 
ences all kindly supplied by A. Merlin. -»««., 

6 Find of Szillgv^omlyd. F. von Pulszky . Die Goidfunde van S. S., Budapest. 1890 ; 
Baron'de Baye, Le (riser de S. S„ Paris, 1892; Hampel, Altertumerdes fruhen iMtttdalters 
in Ungarn, h, 15 ff. ; iii, pU 14 **■ ; A- R »<#> Die ^trSmische Kumtmdustrte ; btrzygowski, 

% 7. Mer^vmeian brooches. France, H. Hubert, Fibules de Basucux, Rev. arch. 
xxxivfiSoq). 16"? ff. i &v*\zm&,Ledmetwefranet>-m^™gieneftatakngt^ 
pot ParSTtoon. An important collection of such fibulae, mostly of French ongin. formed 
bv I P, Morgan, is now in the Metropolitan Museum at New York. Italy, Cartel Trosmo : 
Atonumenti Sntithi d. Ace dei Lincei, xii (1902), 145 ff. Lingotto : Roto. JW. d, Scavt, 
1010, 194, fie. 1 . Senise : Not. d. Sc. t 1916, 329, fig. 1. In general : \enturi btana def- 
1'Arte &m, iii, 44 %A Orsi, AUi e Memorie delta R. Deputazione at Stonaptr la promnaa 
di Romagna, iii, vol. v, p. 33* <*■ ** h noteworthy that the scabbards of the swords and 
daggers found in Italy (sixth to seventh century aj>.) (one in the Metropolitan Museum) 
show in their lateral prominence great similarity to the Scythian scabbards. Germany, 
Bondorf in Baden (Museum of J%feruhe) k Lindenschmidt, AJt. J^J^^fSfW^S' 
iii, Heft ix, pL 6. England, Kent, ' 

191 5), chap, x, pp^oS ff. ' In 

Thurlow Leeds, The Arcliaeology of the Anglo- 

8. The Syrian and Celtic polychrome styles. I attribute the revival of the poly chrome 
tendency in the Hellenistic world in general to the influence of Persia through Syria and 

inor degree to the revival of the polychrome style in Egypt where it never completely 
died out. See the numerous mentions of Ai0o*«AAr/T« tn both the epigraphic and the 
literary sources of the Hellenistic period, e, g. the gift of Sekucus I to Apollo of Didyma, 
Dittenberger, Or, gr. mscr. 214. 47 - *v*rhp frtpfaf»*te XiBokMos, cp. I heophr ^nar^t. 
zx\ Parmenion Athen. 11. p. 781c cf. p. 784a; Theopomp, Htst. 125 (vases); Calhx, 
Athen.s,p.2oob(chiton); VhA.AUx.yi(T*f»Tpa K frMv) t toe. Another expression constantly 
used to designate jewels and other objects adorned with gerns is b^fm, see e. g. Uitt. 
SyU* t, 86, b-% (Athens) ; 5SS, 4, 184, 198 (Delos), cp. Calhx. apud Athen S . P^ *9?n. 
(passim) ; Men. iv, 219 ; Aristoph.. fr. 31° (Blaydesj ; Ael. NA.vul 4 (p. 203, 24) ; 
frT272, 20 ; Strabo xv T p. 709, &c. Note tnat almost all these authorities mention Persian, 
Syrian, Egyptian, Indian jewels and plate. A good archaeological instance is the recent 
find of silver plate and gold jewels in Theasaly, Arvanitopullos, Ath. Mtti. 191 2, p. 71";* 
pi VI The date (second century B.C.) is given by silver vases of Kco-Attic style. Inis 
revival of the feeling for polychromy in the Hellenistic world probably influenced (through 
Massilia) the ancient Celtic metal industry (enamel never ceased to be used in Persia 
and Egypt, and had a revival in Egypt under the Ptolemies, instance— the Meroe nnd) 
which was always fond of bright colours. It gave rise just at that time (third to second 
century B.C.) to the famous Celtic enamels of Gaul, Germany, and especially Britain 
(sec British Museum Guide, Early Iron Age, London, 1905, 87 ff. ; S. Rcinach, Rev. 


arch, 1905 <«), 309 fF. ; Kisa, Dm Glas, i, Ifl g 0n T , ™. 

Mmnzer Fettehrifr 1002, 53 ff.). To hes^earlv Sw J! "p ** m « enera1 ' R^nccke. 
movement towards polychmmy in early ^dlate S ? E ™P* owed ^ Powerful 
its tun, .prepared the ground for ihTSumphal m,«hrf S^\ "J? *& !~«™«« ™ 
is worth noting that Hellenistic ™J^™ P ■ 7 5 °_ f Sa «nato~Gothic jewellery It 
to South £3 *here t^n^S^^^i^ ^ kind f -»d th2 way 
b. c. (ArtyuJchov's barrow). Tn« fc3£ ena^dt jf* "^ «*» ^wcoiMlcentiiiy 
the workshop of Anthcuaj 'were aL bro^ht to SnnfU C Second u a ^ **«« century a. £ 
(scores .of the* have been found at a£ ^ C^^^'P ^ b >; Roman ^ M ^ 
easily dwtingu»h.We from the p^^^fliSSS^ *** *** But ** - e 
wor k y^^^ of Europe. In most of the 

Alans in the conquest of ttfiltt** Sarmatians and especially by the 
the Alans long resided in Gad <L StankE aISSSL S*™^™*^** 1 ™ 

from the Danube; that they invaded l3v and tb^" "**• P^^^PP^red 

the Koiio^ Th€ ^ 1— -^ to chapter II,. and 

Berlin, 1015, p. vi) propels to ^TfiS SLf™*"**^ H * ^ A""***?*** sjmlJ*, 

**2i£S^ Rosrovt^W*/ 

kovski ' Archaic Period in XL^TfT^" ^Tl' SftfePte P- *i B " F»™- 

Kuhan {fifth to fourth dUry b. c £4to - « $ KG ^JTS'i 'T™ T the 
(Ashmofean Museum) (fifth centurvT cV fi« ^ r ' f? J.- '» ' E ; ^P* 13 ^ 
century B . c,>-fig. w.^H-fcL d'fT W t j™***""^^ ft*™** (fourth 
century b. c£-fig, 21, E * ' *** " Dn «P» «pon (fourth to third 

in my fb^ZS article 1 " ^Itfth £* ^T^* ^ "? ™™**» *■ be found 
Chicago, io.2 t C5h«« Clay figures, 1, Prolegomena to the history of Derive AmSSJ, 


Chicago, 1 914 ; Smo-Iranica , Chicago, 1919 (all, except the first, publications of the Field 
Museum of Natural History in Chicago, Anthropological Scries), 

17. Supposed influence of China on South Russia. Reinecke, Zeitschrift fur Ethno- 
logfe, xxvLii (1S96), 1 fT. and xxix (1892}, 141 fT. ; Munstcrberg, 1.1. , i, 36 ff. ; Minns, *#o. 

18. The* Siberian ' plaques in China. Minns, 380 ; Sir Hercules Read, Man, 1917, 
1 ft\, pi. A ; Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, June 1018, 13s fF. 

19. Scythian influence on Central and Eastern Russia. A. M. TaUgren, Die Kupfer- und 
Bronzezeit m Nord- und Chtrussland : I. Die Kupfer- und Bronzezeit in Norckpestrusfland, 
Die altt-re Meiallseit in f'htrusslund, Helsingfors, 191 1 * //. Uipoqus dite tTAnanino dans la 
Russie orientate, Helsingfors, 1 91 9 (with full bibliography), ef. idem. Collection Zaoussailov 
au Musi* historique de Finlande a Helsingfors t Helsingfors, 1:918. 

so. Animal style in the Perm district. Hj. Appeigren-Kivalo, ' Die Grundziige des 
skythisch-permischen Ornamentstiles \ Suomen Muinaisrmdsioyhdistyksefi Aikakanskirja 
(Journal of the Finnish Archaeological Society), xxvi (1912) ; idem,, * The Main Features of 
the Scytho-Permian Ornamental Style* (in Russian), Proceedings of Hie Fifteejitft Archaeological 
Congress at Novgorod, 1914, vol. i ; A. Spitsyn, 'Antiquities of the Chudfolk on the Kama 
in the Teploukhov Collection *, AlJi.R. 26, St* Petersburg, 1902 (in Russian). 

21 . North German animal style. B. Salin , Die altgermanische Thierornamentik, Stock- 
holm, 1904 ; Appelgren-Kivalo, ' Om den s. k. Karolingiska stilens ursprung ' (On the 
Origin of the so-called Carolingian Style), Opusada archaeologica O. MonteHo dicata, 19 13 ; 
Brpgger, Oseberg-shibet, Cristiania (vol. i, 1918 ; vol. iii, 1920). 


The current view wliich denies the existence of any link connecting the liistory 
of Slavonic and the history of pre-Shvonic Russia or rather the possibility of finding 
such links is expressed in the leading works on Russian history, c. g. V. O, Kluchcvski, 
A liistory of Russia (trans! . by C. J. Hogarth), vol. i (London and New York, 191 1) ; 
S. Plalonov, Lectures on Russian History, Pctrograd, 1417 (the latest edition accessible 
to me) , &c. D . Bagalei's point of view, in his History of Russia , Charkov, 1 9 1 2 , is different : 
but his treatment of the two periods is apposition not connexion. The same must be said 
of the works of Hrushevski on the history of the Ukraine (M. Hrusevsky, Geschichte des 
Ukrainiscken Volkts, i, Lcipsic, 1906, cp. Abrigi de Phistoire de rUkrawe % Paris, 1920), 
The only scholars who have felt (rather than proved) this connexion are the archaeologists, 
e. g. Zabclin (History of Russian Life) and Rondakov* Compare my forthcoming article* 
* Lcs origines de la Russie Kievienne *, Revue des Etudes Slaves, 1922, For the archaeo- 
logical data on which my summary is based, see the preceding chapters. For the Germans 
on the Dnieper, see the works of Arne quoted on ch. vi, no. 1 6. 


Abdera, 229. 

Achacans, 61. 

Achaemenides, 140. 

Achilles, White Island of, 36. 

Adnaces, 129. 

Acropolis of Pantkapaeum, io. 

Adrianople, 230. 

Adriatic Sea, 16. 

Aegean civilization, 15, 61, 193 ; islands, 

32 ; sea, 147, 152, 153, 
Aegina, 228. 

Aeginetan standard, 228. 
Aeolian art, 49 ; colonies, 55, 
Aeschylus, 37, 
Africa, North, 119, 131, 141, 186, 187, 190, 

23S » 2 36- 
Agamemnon, 6j. 

Agate, 129. 

Agathyrsians, 107. 

Agilulf, king, 231. 

Agrippa, 151, 153. 

Afcrippea, 157. 

Ahuramazda, 104, 180. 

Aia, 62. 

Aietes, king, 18. 

AI-Tod6r, 1 55 , 1 63 , 236, 

Akhtanlzovka (Akhtanizovskaya Stanitsa), 

tumulus, 127,131, 136,138, 189,232,233, 
Akkerman, 221, 
Alabastron, 175. 
Alans, 114, iifr-zi, 139, 143, 146,203, 217, 

2 1 8, 231, 236 ; White Alans, #. Roxalans. 
Alcibiades, 67. 
Alexander the Great, 70, 84, 86, 98, 109, 

151 ; portraits, 204 ; sarcophagus, III. 
Alexandria, 151,231,233. 
Alexandrian glass, 128, 133. 
Alexandropol, tumulus, 4, 56, 95, 102, J38. 
Alphabetical signs, Sarmatian, 130, T40, | 

*&7 1 2 34 I t?. Monograms. 
Alpine provinces, 215, 
Altai Mountains, 32, 124, 197, 202. 
Amage, queen, 150. 
Amazons, 33, 34, 37, 225 a t representations, 


Amber, 50, 57, 59, 132, 142. 
Amethyst, 135.* 

Amisos, 10, 63, 67, 82, 162. 

Ammianus Marcellinus* 13, 113, 

Amphi polis, 88. 

Amphorae, for wine and oil, 48, 88, 102 ; 

silver, 23 z, 
Anacharsis, 65, 
Anaitis, 11, 104, 

Ananyino, find, 206 ; civilization, 64. 
Anapa, 3, 4, 72, 138, 232, 233, 
Anglo-Saxon period, 188, 189 ; polychrome 

style, 191. 
Ani, 220. 
Animals, representations of, 11, 16, 24-8, 

50 2, 54, 56, 58, 59, 89, 97, 99, 124, 132, 

136, 138, 139, 171, 185, l86, I92-S, 2CO, 

20 S» 2 °7f 233 ; as motive of ornamenta- 
tion, 51, 173, 188, 193, 194, 196, 198, 200, 
205 ; fantastic, 50, 53, 140, 142, 193, 195, 
196, 198-200, 207, 236 ; sacred or sym- 
bolical, 29, 56, 108, 192, 198, 200 ; 
winged, 50, 192 ; row or frieze, 22-6, 29, 
52, 138, 188, 192, 20 1, 2035 ; forming 
a circle, 192, 195 j heraldic combination, 
24, 28, 40, 51, 192, 193, 196, 200, 201, 
2 °S i fighting , hunting, or devouring 
another animal, 26, 53, 59, 134, 140, 192, 
*93> *95» 2 °' * fighting with human 
beings or gods, 192 ; combinations, 24, 
52, 59, 142, 192, 195, 199, 206 ; combina- 
tions with human figures, 24, 59, 192, 
201 ; network, 192, 193, zoo, 207 ; or 

parts of animals covering the surface of 
an object or of the body of another 
animal, 52, 135, 193, 195, 200, 203, 206 ; 
contorted to suit a given space, 51, 58, 59, 
134, 142, 192, 194, 202, 203, 207, Z28 ; 
with reverted heads, 58, 59, 192, 194, 
200 ; biting its tail, 195 ; heads, 48, 50, 

52, 5&» S9i in» t24« 1 &b 'I? 2 " *95» s 9&i 
198-200, 207; parts, ci, 53, 195, 199, 

200 ; treatment of the eye, ao, 27 ; 

extremities as animals nr parts of animals, 

5>» 53» 5 8 » «4 2 t T 95* »99» 2O0 > 2 ° 2 > 2 °3> 
206, 207 ; horns as ornamental motive, 
j 95, 196, 2OX-3 ; combined with flora) 
motives, 54, 193, 200, 201, 205, 207; 
gcometrized, 16, 24,27, 29, 188, 193, 195, 



199 2.Q i , 207 ; combined with geometric 
motives, 40, 198 ; V, Birds, 
Animal style, 31, 93. 178, 181, 182, 191-4, 
198, 200, 207. 208 ; Asia, Central, 197, 
200,201; Minor, 102, 193; Assyrian, 50, 
CQ, 129, 142. 193, 197, 198, 200; Baby- 
lonian, 198, 200 ; Bronze Age, 28, 40, 19 1 ; 
Chinese, 197-201, 205, 237 ; Cimmerian, 
40; Elarnitic, 191 ; Germanic, 181, 207, 
237 ; Greek, 193, 197, 201 ; Ionian, 52, 
129, 136* 193, 195, 201 ; Iranian, 136, 
137, 193, 197, 205 \ Middle Ages, 191 ; 
Parthian, 202 \ Persian, 50, 58, 59, 142, 
193, 201, 202 ; Primitive, 28, 29, 58, 191, 
236 ; Sarmatian, 14, 122, 124, 129, 152, 

134. nS> *4*. l8 *» l8 5. 191. 201-6; 
Scandinavian, 206, 207, 237 ; Scythian, 
24*40,50-9,89, 102, in, 130, 142, 188, 

f 93i l 95 2 °3> ao6 > 2 °7* 23 7» *37 J 
Siberian, 197, 237 ; Sumerian, 192, 198. 

Antaradoa, 189, 

Antelopes, representations, 23, 24. 

Antennae, 90, 

Antes, 219. 

*Avr(iox o * r ) ^tafftAews), 176. 

'Ajflrftdreufov) /^tunAed)?)., 176. 

Antoninus Pius, 154, 163, 215, 

Antonovteh, V., 5. 

Antony, 151. 

Aorsians, 116. 120. 

Aphrodite, 33, 72, 73 ; representations, 73, 

159; Heavenly, 107; N aval's, 157. 
Api, 107. 
AiroA-, 228. 
Apollo, 107, 228 ; of Didyma, 236 ; temple 

at Phasis, 128. 
'AjtoAAwj'os *Hyffj4vos 5p «i»iov, 128. 
Apollonia, 151, 
Apotropaeic decoration, 56 ; eye, 59 ; 

figures, 234. 
Apulians, 82. 
Aquila, 163, 164. 
Arabic art, 130 ; lands, 219. 
Aral Sea, 121. 

Arch of Gafenus, 13, 119, 169, 231. 
Archeanactids, 67. 
ArchitecUiral style in painting, 171. 
Ares, 107. 
Argirnpasa, 107* 

Argonaut *c expedition, legend of, 61, 62. 
Argonauts, 18, 43, 6a, 228. 
Anaramnes, satrap, 84. 
Arimaspians, yj. 
Aripharnes, king, 163. 

Armavir, tumulus, 127, 131, 132, 232, 234. 

Armenia, wars of the Alans with. 116, 118 : 
Cimmerian invasion, 35 ; cult of the 
Great Goddess, 73 ; monarchy, 13, 71, 
158, ii$9 j objects from, 53 ; Human 
armies in, 154, 234 ; Scythians in, 10, 35, 
36, 83, 84 ; Vannic kingdom, 35. 

Armenians, 36. 

Armour, Bosphuran, 169 1 171; Roman, 
158 ; Sarmatian, 120, 143, 144, 169, 177, 
182 ; Scythian* 54, 55, 57 ; scale and 
ring, 46, 159, 169* 204 ; v. Corslet. 

Anns t Chinese, 203, 204 ; Gothic, 184, 185, 
190; Sarmatian, 123, 125, 129, 183; 
Scythian, 100 ; c. Weapons. 

Arms of Panticapaeum : trie griffin and the 
lion, 10, 80. 

Arne, T.» 146, 215, 238. 

Arrian, 13, 63, 113, 118, 130. 

Arrows, 46, 121, 227 : with triangular 
bronze heads, 55, 122, 204. 

Artemidorus of Ephe&us, 115. 

Artemis, 33 ; representation, 72 ; Agrotera, 


ArtyukhAv's farm, tumulus, 4, 172, 174, 
189, 232, 233, 236. 

Aaandrochos, king, 152. 

Asandros, king, 150, 151, r57, 160, 167. 

Ashguzai, 35, 60* 

Ashtk, A., 2, 175, 176, 178. 

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 4, 11, 193, 
229, 237. 

Asia, Central, 8, 221 ; art, 132, 141, 143 j 
influence on China, 204, 205 ; origin of 
the animal style, 197, 200 ; of the 
Sarmatians, 121 ; political and economic 
conditions in the 4th and 3rd cent. B.C., 
114, 115 ; neolithic pottery, 15 ; trade 
with S. Russia, 164, 210, 213. 

Asia Minor, 109, 151, 152; animal style, 
102, 193 ; art } 49, 53, ill j Bronze, 
Copper, and Iron Ages, 32, 94 ; Celts in, 
214 ; Cimmerians in, 36, 38, 41 ; coins, 
79 j commercial relations with S. Russia, 

43. 55 » 6l » 6 *> 6 4> 8 3» *« ; graves, 77, 
78 ; Greek colonies, 12, 44, 82 ; influence 
on S. Russia, 55, 208 ; matriarchy, 33, 
34 ; names, 168 ; objects from, 3, 49, jo, 
53, 80, 141, 182 ; political and economic 
conditions in the 5th and 4th cent. B.C., 
68, 70, 71 ; in the 1st cent, b.c, 149 ; 
neolithic pottery, 15 ; religion, 72, 73, 
179 ; Scythians in, 10, 3.6, 38, 41, 83, 107. 
Aspurgians, 152, 160. , 



Aspurgos, king, 152, T53, 156, 166. 

Asses, representations, 27, 58 ; v. Horses, 

Assurbanipal, 35. 
Assyria, 35, 36, 38, 57, 58, 129, 130, 141, 

, 193/ *97« 
Assyrian monuments, 38, co ; objects, 51, 

227 ; sources, 35, 36, 38, 39 ; style, 50, 

57».*3°» "97- 
Assyrians, 35. 

Assyro-Babylonian art, 50, 200. 

Assyro-Chaldean weight, 58. 

Assyro-Persian art, 59 ; objects, 193, 237 ; 
sculptures, 11 ; style, 50, 122, 142, 193 i 
world, 124. 

"Affrai, 234. 

Astara, 179, 234. 

Astarabad, treasure, 37-9, 

Astarte, 234, 

Ateas, king, 86. 

Athena, representations, 54 ; head, 233 ; 
mastering a giant, 137. 

Athenaeum, 67. 

Athenian art, 109 ; colonies, 68, 78 ; in- 
scription, 69 ; influence on Scythian art, 
54 j origin of the Odryaian kings, 157 \ 
standard, 229, 

Athenians, 67, 85, ioq, 156. 

Athens, commercial relations with S. Russia, 
68—70, 229 ; imperialism, 13 ; objects 
from, 3, 53 ; political and economic 
conditions, 12, 66-8, 89, 90, 147, 148, 
212, 228, 229 ; supremacy, 67. 68, 78, 85, 

Athens, 236. 

Attendants buried with the master, 45, 47-9, 

Attica, 82. 

Attic historians, 69 ; vases, 53, 54, 74 ; 
Neo-Attic style, 236, 

Attila, 218, 

Aucissa, 130. 

Augustan period, 130 ; sculptors, 78, 

Augustus, 151-3, 157, 158, 166,214, 

Aurelius, Marcus, 118, 154, 178, 215 ; 
statues, 159. 

Austria. 131, 141, 187, 

Avars, 219. 

Axes, Bactrian, 59, 228 ; Cimmerian, 40, 
41 ; Elamitic, ^8 ; Persian, 58, 59, 228 ; 
prehistoric, 29, 30 ; Roman, 158 ; 
Scythian, 50, 193 j Vannic, 228. 

Azov Sea, 32, 33, 39, 42, 43, 62, 64, 65, 95, 
96, 113, 116. 



Habelon, E„, *37- 

Babylonia. 25, 57, 58, 80, 108, 141 , 193. 

Babylonian monuments, 25, 59 j world, 

Babylono- Assyrian art, 51, 198. 

Baby lono- Persian sculptures, io. 

Bactria, 59, 203. 

Bactrian axe, 228 ; portraits of kings, 204. 

Baden, 236. 

Baer, K., 62. 

Baealei. D., 238, 

BaJakliva, 62. 

Balkan peninsula, 85, 94, 139, 214, 230; 

rivers, 66 ; Slavs, 220. 
Baltic Sea, 206, 210, 213, 215, 219, 222. 
Baluchistan, 59, 1 15. 
Bartatua, king, 35. 
Basin, bronze, 175, 
Baskets with fruit, nuts, or eggs, 170. 
BasHeux, find, 236. 
Bastarnians, 116, 139. 
Batum, 63. 
Beads, 184 ; glass, 175 ; gold, 19-22, 30, 

31 ; precious stone, 19-22, 175. 
Bears, representations, 22, 25, 27, 28 ; 

attacking a horse, 205. 
Bedniaktivo, tumulus, 88, 
Belashcvski, N.„ «;. 
Belck, 58. 
Belgrade, 220. 

Bells, bronze, 48, 49, 56, 09, 175. 
Belts, 29, 53, 142, 182, 185, 200, 202, 205 ; 

v. Clasps. 
Ben£dite, A,, 26. 
Berezan, island, 3, 44, 63* 65. 
Berlin Museum, 53. 
Berths cut in the tomb chamber, 170. 
Beslenecvskava Stanftsa, grave, 125, 174, 

232, 233. 
Bessarabia, 16, 40, 226. 

Biers, 49. 

Birds, representations, 23, 24, 27, 49, 53 

58 ; heads, 48, 51, 52, 58, 185, 195, 202, 

206, 207 ; beaks, 52, 195, 200, 206, 207 ; 

eyes, 52, 195 ; wings, 134 ; t,\ Animals. 
Bisutun (Behistun), 55 » 229. 
Bithynia, 13, 71, 82, 162. 
Bits, t>. Bridles. 
Black Valley (Chdrnaya Dolina), tumulus. 

95, 230, 
Blaramberg, J. de, 2. 
Bliznitsa, Botshaya {Great}, tumulus, 4, 

73» 76, 81 ; Malaya (Little), tumulus. 



Boars, wild, representations, 23, 27, 28 ; 

combination with a Lion and a goat, 59 ; 

heads, 195 ; mastered by Herakles, 138 ; 

tooth with a gold mounting, 122. 
Bobrinskoy, Ct. A., 5, 6, 90, 93. 
Boeckh, A,» 6, 163. 
Boerebista, king, 151, 
Bondorf , find, 236. 
Boomerang as symbol of a deity, 29. 
Bori, find, 232, 233. 
Bosphoras, straits, 61, 62, 67 ; v. Kerch, 

Bosphorus, Cimmerian, straits, 9, 12, 13, 

33*.37-9> 43* 6 5* & * "54 i *■ Kerch, 

Bosphorus, Thracian, straits, 68, 154, 217. 
Bottles, gold, 130, 132, 140, 142, 175, 177, 

233 ; inscribed, 234. 
Bows, Cimmerian, 41 ; Sarmatian, 121, 

129, 169 ; Scythian, 55, 121, 227, 
Bow-cases, Scythian, 55, 227; v. Gorytus, 
Boxes, toilet, 170 ; of wood, 171. 
Bracelets, 76, x 1 1 , 142, 177, 182 ; of beads, 

21,30,31; gold, 102, 125, 133, 175, 176, 

187 ; stiver, 79 ; snake, 53. 
Brandenburg, 93. 
Brenner, E., 187. 
Brczovo, tumulus, 88, 89, 105. 
Bridles, Assyrian, 56, 130, 227 ; Hittite, 

56 i Sarmatian, 125, 129, 171, 175-7; 

Scythian, 48, 52, 54, 55, 58, 88, 89, 99, 

102, in, 134; bits, 46, 89; v. Horse 

Britain, 104, 236. 
British Museum, 11, 40, 56 8, 108, 133* 

188, 189. 228. 
Bronze Age, 11, 14, 15, 17, 22, 28-32, 40, 

58, go, 92, 122, 197. 
Brooches, gold, 128, 174, 182, 188, 189, 

233, 236 ; f. Fibulae. 
Brooklyn Museum, 26. 
Brown, Baldwin G., 189. 
Buckinghamshire, 188. 
Buerova Mogila, grave, 125, 174, 232. 
Bug, river, 15-17, 42-4, 63-5, 87, 90, 92, 

94, 96, 145, 201, 2t2, 213, 221, 230. 
Bulgaria, 42, 77, 88-90, 97, 105, 137, 220, 

224, 232. 
Bulgarian phalarae, 138, 233 ; V. Phalarae. 
Bulgars, 220* 
Bulls, representations, 22-4, 26, 27, 29, 30, 

192 ; heads, 56, 105 ; v. Oxen. 
Burials, Caucasian, 29, 30 ; Hittite, 31 ; 

t). Graves, 

Byzantium, 14, 155, 208, 220. 
Byzantine culture, 221 ; empire, 155, 219- 
22; emperor, 220; reliefs, 231. 

Cabinet des Medailles, Paris, 136, 137. 

Caesar, Julius, 150, 151, 214. 

Caesars, names, 150. 

Caesarea, 157. 

Cairo Museum, 27. 

Callinicus, Julius, funeral inscription, 235. 

Calvados, 187. 

Cameos, 135, 177. 

Candelabra, bronze, 53, 128. 

Canopy, funerary, 20, 21, 24, 20, 30, 48-50, 

S 2 » j 6 » 97. 99. ,02 » 22 7. 2 3 2 - 

Caparison, 97, 130 ; v. Horse trappings. 

Capital, wooden, representing a besieged 
city, 231 . 

Capitol, Pan ticapaeum, 158. 

Cappadocia, 82 ; Cimmerians in, 36, 40 ; 
cult of the Great Coddess, 73 ; economic 
conditions, 162 ; monarchy, 71 ; Roman 
armies in, 1 18, 154 ; Scythians in, 10, 11. 

Cappadotian art, 11, 53, 139, 193 ; bronzes, 
40, 56; colonists in the Crimea, 150; 
satrap, 84. 

Caracalla, Antoninus, 176. 

Carchemish, 31, 193. 

Carta, 77. 

Carian legends, 43, 61, 62. 

Carians, 19, 61, 62, 65, 228. 

Carlsruhe Museum, 236. 

Carnarvon Collection, 26. 

Carnelians, beads, 19, 21, 175 ; fixed in 
bezels, 178. 

Carolingian style, 237. 

Carpathtans, mountains, 219, 221. 

Cars, funeral, v. Chariots. 

Carthage, 131, 187, 235. 

Carthaginian tomb, 187. 

Carts, funeral, zk Chariots. 

Caspian Sea, 38, 115, 121, 122, 220. 

Cassite deity, 29. 

Castcl Trosino, 236. 

Cat tribe, representations, 195. 

Caucasian bronzes, 227 ; burials, 29, 30 ; 
Hermonassa, 19 ; mountains, 40, repre- 
sentation, 28. 

Caucasus, 7-9, 54, 55, 136, 208 ; animal 
style, 31 ; Argonautic legends, 62 ; 
Bronze Age, 28, 32, 40 ; Cimmerians in, 
38, 40 ; Copper Age, 21, 28, 31 ; cult of 
Sabazios, 180 ; Darius 1 ' expedition, 84 ; 
Greek colonies, 63, 64 - metals, 18 ; 



objects from, 133, 142, 233 ; pirates, 63 ; 
Sarmatians in, 113, 116-18. 128, 144; 
Scythians in, 83 5, 227 ; Centra) Cauca- 
sus, finds and cemeteries, 232 ; Northern, 
53 ; Bronze Age, 28 ; Copper Age, 21, 
22, 28, 29, 30, 32 ; inlaid technique. 58 ; 
intercourse with the Crimea, 38 ; objects 
from, 185 ; Southern, Copper Age, 28 ; 
finds, 53. 

Cauldrons, 102, 130, 138, 139, 205, 227, 
232 ; inscribed, 130, 140, 233, 234. 

Celt, bronze, 40, 

Celtic enamels, 236 ; fibula, 130 ; style, 189, 
190, 236 ; tribes, 87, 145 ; world, 130. 

Celto-Germanic current, 116. 

Celto-Scythiana, 139, 145, 

Celts, 116, 139. 172, 213, 214, 230, 

Cemeteries, excavation, 3, 4, 74, 229 ; 
Bronze Age, 28 ; Central Caucasus, 232 ; 
Copper Age, 19 ; crematory, urn fields, 
146 ; Egyptian, 19 ? Elamitic, 19 ; Ger- 
man, 214 ; Gotho-Sarmatian, 185 ; 
Greek, 3, 65, 74, 75, 78, 82, 110, i^o, 
229 ; Mesopotamian, 19 ; Middle Dnie- 
per, 213 ; neolithic, 90 ; Pontic, 10 ; 
Sanitarian, 125, 143, 1^4, 164 ; Scythian, 
'*?» 5*. 54* 97. l6 3 J Ihractan, 229. 

Chain of gold tubes, 102. 

Chalcedony, 177, 178. 

Chalcolithic culture, 5, 15, 17. 

Chaldian kingdom of Van, 35, 58. 

Chalybians, 18, 61. 

Chamber graves, v. Graves, 

Champlev?, tf. Enamel. 

Chariots, funeral, 45, 48, 49, 52, 56, 76, 97, 
99, 102, in, 227. 

Chavannes, E«, 237. 

Chelidon, funeral inscription, 235. 

Chemaya Dolina, tumulus, c. Buck Valley. 

Chernigov, 185, 215. 

Chersonesans, 148, 149* 

Chersonese, Thracian, 85, 90. 

Chersonesus, Byzantine, 155, 217 ; ceme- 
tery, 3 ; coins, 72, 73 ; cults, 72, 179 ; 
Dorian character, 74 ; enamels, Celtic, 
236 ; economic conditions, t2, 64,68, 69, 
76, 164 ; Founded by Ionians, 63 ; Goths 
and, 217, 218; inscriptions, 151, 235; 
political life, 147 151 ; Scythians and, 
70; Roman occupation, 154, 155, 163. 

Chertomlylc, tumulus, 4, 5, 95,97, 102, 104, 

China, 115, 132, 198-205, 210, 233, 237. 

Chinese, 198, 200, 204, 205, 233. 

Chinese animal style, 197-201, 205, 237 ; 

art, 132, 197-200, 205 ; emperors, 160 j 

funerary ceremonies, 49 ; frontier, 114 ; 

graves, 1 70, 204, 205 ; military life, 203 ; 

objects, 129, 132, 198 200, 204, 205, 234 ; 

sources, 114, 115; Turkestan, 115-, 

Wall, 115, 205. 
Chirp&n, 88. 

Chrnyreva Mogila, tumulus, 95, 102. 
Chriatiania, 207. 
Chthonic divinities, 73, 179, 
Chu dynasty, 198-200, 205, 237. 
Chuiek, find, 185, 232. 
Churches, Christian, decoration of, 171. 
Chvojka, V,, 5, 16, 90, 93. 

Cimmero-Maeotian population, 65 ; v» 

Circe island, 62. 

Circlet, gold, 175, 176, 

Cities, representations, besieged, 231 ; for- 
tified, 160. 

Clamps, bronze and iron, in masonry, 78, 

Clasps, 52, 106, 177, 161, 183, 184 ; belt 

clasps, 40, 50, 51, 132-5, 140, 167. 

Claudius, Emperor, 118, 154. 

Clazomenai, 63. 

Clazomenians, 43 , 6$. 

Cloisonne, v. Enamel. 

Cnidos, 114. 

Coffins, 74-7, 80, 108 ; wooden, 170, 171, 
175, 178 ; wooden painted, 3 ; wooden 
carved, gilded, and painted, 171 ; with 
plaster figures, 172 ; inlaid, 76, 171. 

Coins, 183 ; Aeginetan, 228 ; Athenian, 
229 ; Bosphoran, 10, 11, 66, 73, 79, 80, 
109, 151, 156-60, 167, 170, 179, 180, 183, 
184, 214, 215, 228, 229 ; Cnersoncsus, 
72, 73 1 Cyzicus.80; Greek, 95, 130, 229 ; 
Olbia, 216; Pontic, 104; Roman, 141, 
183,184,214,215; Samos, 79, 228 ; Sas- 
sanian, 234; Scythian, 86, 231 ; Thra- 
cian, 158 ; Tyras, 216 ; v. Imprints of 

Colchians, 18. 

Collar, silver, 22. 

Column of Trajan, 13, 169. 

Comb, gold, 102, 108. 

Comrnagcne, 13,71, 158. 

Commodus, 1541 «57» 178- 

Communion, holy, or royal investiture, or 
sacred oath, representations, 89, 104-6, 

Constantine, 217. 



Constantinople, 136, 210, 213, 219, 220. 

Constant ius II, 184, 217. 

Contracted skeletons, burials with, v. Graves. 

ContzestK find. 1 05, 232. 

Copper Age, 4, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22, 28-30, 32, 

34* SO. S&» 90. 9*. 94. 191. 2*4> »5- 

CoraJ, 135. 

Corridor to the grave, 49 ; cut in the rock 
or earth, 170 ; lined with wood, 47, 48 ; 
of dressed stone, vaulted, 75, 79. 

Corslets, 227 ; cast iron, 121, 123 ; Greek, 
54 ; scale, 55, 100 ; scale or ring armour, 
121, 129, 143, 169; v. Armour; breast- 
plates, V. Pectorals. 

Costume, Cimmerian, 40, 41 ; Bosphoran, 
159, 168, 169, 171 ; Sarmatian, 130,231 ; 
Sicythian, 55, 57, 73, 102, 104, 227. 

Cotys, king, 153. 

Cotys, name, 156. 

Cousinery, 1. 

Cowley, A,, 167, 

Cremation, 74, 170, 

Cretan civilization, 15, 

Cretans, 61 . 

Crimea, Bronze Age, 28 j Byzantine, 155, 

217 ; economic conditions, 1 8, 63, 64, 69, 
164 ; excavations, 4, 5 ; finds, 52, 173, 
185 ; Germans in, 119 ; Goths in, 217, 

218 ; Greek cities, 147, 148 ; intercourse 
with the Caucasus, 38 ; Italian colonies, 
221 ; legends, 36 ; matriarchy, 34 ; 
Mithridates* wars, 116, 149, 150 ; objects 
from, 54, 8o, 97 ; protected position, 9 j 
Romans in, 118, 154, 155, 163; Scy- 
thians in, 39, 42, 54, 69, 70, 86, 96, 98, 
no, 114, 115, 117, 120, 147, 154, 160, 
162, 163, 165, 168, 226, 231. 

Crowns, 182 ; funerary, 159, 170, 174-8, 
184 ; gold, 232 ; royal with the image of 
the Roman emperor, 158 

Cumans, 221 . 

Cumont, F., 180. 

Cups, gold, 45, 48 ; silver, 48, 123, 175 ; 
with horned handles, 91. 

Curtain of the funeral canopy, 21. 

Curtius, L., 192. 

Cumle chair, 158. 

Cylinders, Babylonian, 59. 

Cyprus, 193, 

Cyzicene staters, 79. 

Cyzicus, 79, 80, 109, 229. 

Dacla, 1 18. 
Dacians, 116, 145. 

Daggers, Caucasian, 29 ; Chinese, ring- 
headed, 204 ; Egyptian, stone, 29 ; Per- 
sian, 228 ; barmatian, 121, 143, 175, 177 ; 
ring-headed, 169, 204 ; Scythian, 51, 
55 ; sheaths, Sarmatian, 124 ; Scythian, 
51, 52; hilt, Sarmatian, 177; pommel, 
Sarmatian, 178 ; v* Swords. 

Dalton, O., 57. 

Dalyi, find, 40, 226. 

Danube, region of the river, ethnological 
and political aspect in the 2nd cent. B.C. 
145 ; finds, 138 ; Gaulish advance, 70 
Germans in, 214, ZjB ; Getians in, 87 
Gotho-Sarmatian civilization, 185, 187 
Greek colonies, 63 ; intercourse with 
S. Russia, 7, 8, 209 ; neolithic civiliza- 
tion, 5, 16; Romans in, 151, rji, 154, 
215; Sarmatians in, 13, 113-18, 218, 
236 ; Scythians in, 83-7, 90, 96, 98 - 
Thracians in, 41. 

Danubian frontier of the Roman Empire, 
119; Greek colonies, 63 ; provinces, 
116-18, 190, 215, 216. 

Dardanelles, 38. 

D&rievka, tumulus, 97, 230. 

Darius, 9, 66, 84, 85, 90, 229 ; represented 
on a vase, 76. 

Dead, heroized, painted, 160 ; stelai, 169. 

Deer, representations, 46, 50, 53, 207 ; 
devoured by a lion, 201. 

Deev, tumulus, 95, 230. 

Debs, 70, 81- 

Delphi, 70. 

Demeter, 33, 73, 81, 179 ; head, 81. 

Desna, river, 213. 

Diadem, gold, 20, ai , 23, 30, 31 , 49, 51 , 8S, 
106, in, 132, 133, 135, 142. 335- 

&niAi8</S\, 236. 

Didrachms, silver, 109, 

Didyma, 236. 

Dies, 80, 97. 

Dion Chrysostom, 165, 167, 169. 

Diodorus, 145, 163. 

Dionysos, 80 ; triumph, representation, 

Diorite, 40. 

Diseases, personifications, clay figures, 1 70, 
204, 234. 

Dishes, metal, 184, 217 ; v. Plates. 

Disk, metal, 58. 

Distaff, 175. 

Dnieper, region of the river, Bronze Age, 
17; Cclto-Germanic tribes, 116; Cim- 
merians in, 38 ; cult of the Supreme 



Goddess, 34, 107 ; ethnological and 
political aspect in the 2nd cent. B.C., 145 ; 
excavations, 4, 5 ; finds, 52, 136, 173, 
187, 188, 195, 234, 237 i Finnish tribes, 
213 ; Galatian advance, 87 ; Getonians 
in, 213 ; Germans in, 98, 118, 146, 208, 
214-16, 219, 238 ; gorodishch^s, 230 ; 
Greek colonies, 44,^ 03-5, 162 ; Middle 
Dnieper civilization, 90-4, 230 ; neo- 
lithic civilization, 5, 15-17 ; Russians in, 
208-10, 218-21 ; Sarmatians in, 98, 115, 
116, 118, MS ^ Scythians in, 9, 42, 43, 
70, 88,90, 94-9, no, in, 212,226, 230 ; 
Tartars in, 221 ; Thracians in, 1 16. 

Dniester, river, 4, 15, 17, 63, 87, 93, 96, 230. 

Dobrudzha, 42. 86-8, no, 117, 165, 231. 

Doc, representation, 108. 

Dolmens, 21, 28. 

Domkian, 118, 154, 158. 

Don, region of the river, animal style, 142 ; 
Cimmerians in, 42 ; excavations, 4, 5 ; 
rinds, 58, 136, 142, 185-18, 232 ; Finnish 
tribes, 213 ; Gelonians in, 213 ; goro- 
dishch&s, 330 ; Greek colonies, 69, 85, 
118, 162 ; Khazars in, 220 ; Maeottans 
in, 33 ; polychrome jewellery, 182, 202 ; 
Sarmatians in, 14, 85, 98, 113-16, 118, 

124-0, 129, 135, 139, 143-5* H7» 2 1 ? ; 

Scythians in, o, 42, 43, 70, 90, 95~8» no, 

111, 144, 2x2. 
Donets, river, 136, 213. 
Dorian colonies, 63, 68 ; Greeks, 74. 
Dorians, 66. 
Dots, incised, 137, J 38. 
Dover, 189. 
Dragons, representations, 29, 124, 192, 

198-200, 237. 
Drexel, F., 136, 139. 
Dubois de Montpereux, F., 2. 
Dubrux, P., 2. 
Duck, representation, 22, 
Duodccim scripta, 170. 
Dynamis, queen, 150-4, 156, 157, 159, 166, 

179 ; head, 158. 

Eagles, representations, 24, 50, 142, 180, 
192 ; attacking a goat, 140 ; grasping 
a swan, 140 j beaks, 200 ; eyes, 200 ; 
heads, 50, in, 203; head or an eagle 
devouring a ram's head, 203 ; legs, 199. 

Ear of com, on coins, 80 ; on plaques, 73. 

Ear-pendants* gold, 175 ; V* Earrings. 

Earrings, 30, 31, 79, in ", enamelled, 128, 

134 ; gold, 19, 76 ; with the figure of the 

local goddess, 97 \ with lion's heads, 175. 
Ebert, M., 65, 181. 
Egypt, animal style, 31, 193 ; art, 27, 28 ; 

Copper Age, 19, 22, 24-7, 32 ; inlay 

technique, 57, 58 ; neolithic pottery, 15 ; 

Persian supremacy, 10 ; polychromy, 

172, 182, 236 ; Ptolemaic 70, 166 ; 

standards, 56 \ symbolic figure of, 204. 
Egyptian art » 2 5 J dynasties, 36 ; ivories, 

27 ; monuments, 25 ; pots, 28 ; stone 

daggers, 29 ; stone palettes, 24, 26, 27 ; 

vaults, 75, 76, 78, 79, 81. 
Ekaterinodir, 233. 
Ekattxinoslav, tumuli, no* 
Elam, 15, 19, 24, 27, 28, 30-2, 58, 59. 
Elamitic art, 57 ; seals, 24, 27 ; proto- 

EJamitie tablets, 27. 
Elephants, representations, 25, 28 ; head, 

137 ; helmet, 204. 
Eleusino-Orphic cycle, paintings, 179. 
Elisavetgr&d, 42, 49, 50. 
Elizav&inskaya, tumuli, 41, 48, 54, 201, 

226, 237. 
Elizavetovskaya Stanitsa, tumuli, 124, 143, 

Elks, 54 ; representations, 103, 195, 197 ; 
heads, 195, 196. 

Embossed technique, 27, 51, 53, 89, 129. 
130, 133, 232; v. Repousse. 

Enamel, 14, 52, 124, 125, 128, 131, 133, 134, 
135, 142, 173, 174, 178, 182, 189, 190, 
236 ; champlev^, 182, 190 ; cloisonne, 
50, 52, 57, 124, 134, 182, 185; proto- 
cloisonne, 178, 

Enarearo, 105, 231* 

England, 189. 

English county of Kent, 186, 

Entemena vase, 23 , 24, 26. 

Ephesus, 109, 115. 

Ephorus, 83, 104, 108. 

'Epyuv*. 234. 

Eros, gold statuette, 135. 

Esarhaddon, 35, 38. 

Etruria, 77, 193. 

Etruscan tombs, 82. 

Etruscans, 82. 

Eudoxos of Cnidos, 1 14. 

Eumelos, king, 69, 71, 145, 163, 166. 

Eumolpos, 150. 

Eunuchs, representation, 105. 

Eupator, king, 156, 158. 

Euphrates, river, 35, 58. 

Ei*vxutv6r t T. K*W, funeral inscription, 235. 



Euxine, 33, 36, 68. 

Eyes, animals', 26, 27 ; apotropaic, 59 ; 
birds, 52, 195, 200, 205, 207 ; human, 52. 

Farmak6vski, B,, 3, 20, 28, 65, 95. 

Fatiinovo civilization, 17. 

Fedulovo, find, 136. 

Feline, representations, v. Cat tribe. 

Ferry of the Cimmerians, 37. 

Fibulae, Celtic, 130 ; Cimmerian, 40, 226 ; 
English, 189 ; Prankish, 189 ; Germanic, 
18 1, with foot turned over, 128, 233 ; 
Gothic, 126, 128, 184, 185, 190, tendril, 
185 ; Merovingian, 236 ; Sarmatian, 
128, 130, 175, 182-5, bronze, 125, 175, 
animal-shaped, 128, 183, 185, 186, 188, 
233, boss-shaped, 188, round, 142, 183, 
tendril, 128, 183, 233, with inset stones, 
125, 128, 133, 1X6-8 ; Scandinavian, 
207; La Tine period, 128, 130, 145; 
©. Brooches. 

Field Museum, Chicago, 237. 

Figures, bronze, emblematic, 49 ; clay, 
apotropaic, 234, ithyphallic, 234, repre- 
senting the funeral procession, 204 ; 
painted, apotropaic, 234 ; plaster, glued 
to coffins, 172. 

Filigree technique, 127, 175, 189, 190, 233 ; 
pseudo-, 127, 177, 185, 188, 

Ftlov, B., 88, 89. 

Finnish North, 191, 219 ; tribes, 213. 

Fishes, representations, covered with figures 
of animal a, 52, 193 ; as parts of another 
animal, 200 ; on coins, 80. 

Flasks, oil, 74, 

Flavian dynasty, 118, 158. 

Floral style, 130, in painting, 171 ; motives, 
54, 124, 132, 133, 138, 139, 172, 173, 193, 
196, 200, 207, 232 ; combinecf with 
animals, v. Animals. 

Forks, weapon, 22, 29, 30 ; as symbol of 
a deity, 29, 

Forts of the Cimmerians, 37. 

France, 141, 186, 189, 220, 236. 

Franke, O., 41. 

prankish fibula, 189 ; polychrome Style, 

French, brooches, 236 ; research work in 
S. Russia, 1 , 2. 

FriedJander, G., 62. 

Frontlets, v. Horse trappings. 

Fundukley\ L, 5. 

Funerary ceremonial, Greek, 74, 76, 170 ; 
Greco-Scythian, 76; Greco-Sarmatian, 

1771 of heroic Greece, 77 ; Middle 
Dnieper, 92, 97 ; Sarmatian, 122, 123, 
125, 126, 129 ; Scythian, 4,44-9, 56, 76. 
95 > 97 > 99 » Thracian, 88, 89. 

Fur coat, 22. 

Furniture, Egyptian, 24, 26. 

Furtwangler, A., 42. 

Gaitosyros, 107. 

Gatatians, 87, 1 16, 145. 

Galba, 141 . 

Galerius, arch of, 13, 119, 169, 231. 

Caliche, 138. 

Galicia, 16, 220, 226. 

Galician Russia, 221. 

Gallo-German invasion of S, Russia, 98. 

Games, 170. 

Candhara, 137. 

Gardner, P., 229. 

Gargaza, 163. 

Garnets, 134, 135, 175, 177, 184, 185, 187, 

235 ; fixed in bezels, 175. 
Gaul, 82, 119, 164, 215, 235. 
Gaulish shields, 169; style, 190; tribes, 139. 
Gauls, 70. 
Ge, 107. 

Gebel-el-Araq T 26. 
Gcloilians, 107, 213, 

Gems. 79* 12 9. *3*-4» r 73» 1*8. 190; 
- engraved, 3, 102, 125, 128 ; Sassantan, 
104 ; v. Stones, precious. 

Geniuses, evil., clay figures, 170. 

Geometric style, 29, 124, 181, 191, 197, 
198 ; motives, 15, 16, 31, 41, 56, 91, 124, 
125, 127, 129, 130, 132, 133, 172, 173, 
177, 188-90, 193, 198, 200, 233 ; com- 
bined with animals, v. Animals. 

Geometrized human or divine figure, 1 1 , 16, 
200 ; animals, v. Animals. 

Gepaepyris, queen, J53, 156. 

German advance on the Roman Empire, 
214 ; cemeteries and settlements, 214 ; 
population of the Dnieper region, 215, 
216, 218 ; research work in S. Russia, 6. 

Germanic animal style, i8t, 207, 237 ; in- 
fluence on S. Russia, 184,208 ; lands, 138, 
181 ; North, 181, 191, 209, 219 ; origin 
of the polychrome style, 181 ; ruling 
classes, 190, 218 J tribes „ 5, 13, 70, 87, 
98, 116, 145, 146, 208, 211 ; world, 130. 

Germans, 117-19, 128, 153, 166, 214, 216, 
218, 219, 222, 233, 238. 

Germany, 42, 139, 146,^164, 187, 206, 236 ; 
South, 146. 



Gerrhoi, 45, 95, 96. 
Gctians, 41, 87, 116, 120, 154. 
Geymanov's settlement, find, 233. 
Giants, 33, 73 ; fight with Athena, plaque, 

GiHes, 5. 

Gimir, 36. 

Gimirrai, 35. 

Giraffes, representations, 28. 

Girdle, 106. 

Glass, 164 ; Greek, 120 ; Greco-Roman, 
214; Phoenician, 74; coloured or trans- 
parent inset, 128, 133, 173, 189, 232, 

Glycaria, 167. 

Goats, representations. 26, 41, 56. 192, 195 ; 
devoured by beasts or birds of prey, 53, 
59, 136, 140 ; heads, 195 ; forepart, 53, 

Gods, Great, Supreme, 34, 106, 107, 165, 
179, 180, 234 ; representations, 104, 105, 
159 ; of Death, Chinese, 204 ; local, 97; 
local in classical guise, 137-9, 159, 186; 
Sun God, Oriental, 137 ; of vegetation 
and of reproduction, 73, 80. 

Goddess, Great, 7a, 73, 105^7, 157, 165, 
179, r8o, 234; representations, 11, 50, 
56* 73* 81, 97, 104, 106, 108, in, 138, 
159, 179; Mother, 33, 34 i Potrria 
1 heron, Mistress of Beasts, llortna Qqp&r, 
34* 56 ? representations, 50, 73 ; Serpent- 
footed, 107 ; representations, 73, 107, 
108 ; Supreme, 34 ; temples and sanc- 
tuaries, 33, 72, 73, 107, 179. 

Goetze, A., 207. 

Gold wire ornamentation, 133. 

Golden Fleece, 18. 

Golden Tumulus, near Simferopol, 42, 52, 
137, 173, 226 ; near Kerch, 77, 

Golubinskaya Stanitsa, find, 135. 

Gordian, 183, 184. 

Gorgippia, 4, 72, 77, 157, 162, 164, 165, 
i68 f 172. 

Gorgippos, name, 68. 

Gorodishches, fortified cities, 90, 229, 

Gorodlsov, \\, 17. 

Gorytus, 40, 55, 60, 97, 104, 108, 109, 169 ; 
v. Bow-cases and quivers. 

Goshltevich, V., 65. 

Gothic art. 207, 208 ; attacks on die Roman 
Empire, 217 ; Empire, 9, 1 17, 217, 219 ; 
influence on S. Russia, 184 ; invasion, 
216,236 ; objects, 126, 187,235 ; period, 
124, 218 ; style, 14, 173, 178, 202. 

Goths, 9, 13, 14, 117-20, i$3» i55» *77i 

180, 181, 183, 185, 186, 190, 208, 216-19, 
2 33 » Tetraxite, 9, 218. 

Granulation technique, 51, 127, 133, i&8, 
189 i pseudo-, 133, 177, 184I 

Grasshopper, representation, 128. 

Gratian, 188. 

Graves, excavation, 3,4, 10 ; Asia Minor, 
77*. 82; Bronze Age, n, 28, 58, 122; 
Chinese, 170, 204, 205 ; Cimmerian, 40 ; 
with contracted skeletons, 8 t 17, 19-21, 
31, 39, 90, 91, 126 ; Copper Age, 4, 19- 
22, 29-31, 224; Egyptian, prehistoric, 
25 ; Etruscan, 77, 82 ; Germanic, 214 5 
Gotho-Sarmatian, 184, 187, 188, 217, 
235 ; Greek, 65, 69, 73. 74, 76-8, 81 , 82, 
142, 161, 168-72, 174-8, 183, r§4, 187, 
204, 217, 229, 234, 23c, ; Greco-Scythian, 
76, 78, 81 ; Macedonian, 77, 82 ; Middle 
Dnieper, 91-4, 213 ; Mycenaean, 77, 78 ; 
neolithic, 122 ; Panticapacan, 11 ; Per- 
sian, 134, T40 ; Sarmattan, 122-30, 132, 

*34* i35» 't'1. 145. »07, 174, 177, 1% 
187, 204, 231-4 ; Scythian, 4, 11, 41,42, 

45. 47-9. 53* 54* 5 8 * 88* 89. 92* 93. 97. 
99-104, 106, no, 122, 129, 130, 134, 145, 

197, 204, 226 ; Thracian> 76-8, 82, 88, 

89 ; Transcaucasian, 58. 

Grave chambers, dug in virgin soil, 99, xoi t 
103, 123, 126, 169, 170 ; rock-cut, 10, 170; 
stone-boxes, 21, 22, 28, painted stone- 
boxes, 21 ; of dressed stone, 10, 88 ; 
with wooden roof, 47 ; with flat roof, 
170 ; vaulted, 74-9. 82, 97, 170, 174, 
175, 178, 229 j double, 78 ; trenches 
lined with wood, 19, 47, 48 ; lined with 
reed, 125 ; house-shaped (khata), 92 ; 
tent-shaped, 47, 49 ; with a wooden tent 
inside, 47 ; with a tent of dressed stone 
inside, 47, 48 ; v, Tombs. 

Greaves, 55, 100. 

Greco-Iberian art, 82, 

Greco-Indian monuments, 137. 

Greco-Italic civilization, 82. 

Greco-Macedonian monarchy, 68. 

Greco- Maeotian state, 72. 

Greco-Thracian cities, 80, 

Griffins, representations, ro, 29, 37, 134, 
138, 140, 142, 188. 192. 196, 203, 233 ; 
eagle-headed, 73, 192, 198, 207 ; lion- 
headed, 10, 58, 80, 192, 198, 200, 204, 
207 ; snake, 198 ; heads, 51 , 56, 1 1 1 , 12a, 
195, 203, 206 ; eagle's, 199, 205 ; horned 
and leonine, 73, 199, 200 ; beaks, 207 ; 
eyes, 205, 207. 


Guards, v. Swords, 
Gundestrup, find, 138, 139, Z32, 
Gurzuf, 185. 
Gutschmid, A, von, 60. 
Gynaecocracy, 33, 

Hadaczck, F., 16, 40. 

Hadrian, 118, 119, 154, 155, 

Halicarnassus, 68. 

Hallstatt culture, 90 ; objects, 93 ; pottery, 

92 ; weapons, 90, 92-4, 97. 
Hamadan, 58, 228. 
Hampel, J., 188. 
Han dynasty, 49, 114, 129, 201, 203-5, *34* 

Handles, 31 ; animal-shaped, 53 , 132, 140, 
186, representing the serpent-footed God- 
dess, 108 ; riveted suspension tubes, 31, 

Hares, representations, 53. 

Harness, 76. 

Head, female, on a garnet, 177 ; of the 
Roman Emperors on coins, crowns, and 
sceptres of Bosphoran kings, 158 ; of the 
Bosphoran kings on coins, 158. 

Hecatacus of Miletus, 19, 38. 

Helios, representation, 105. 

Hellanicus, 18. 

Hellenistic art, 109 ; inscription, 179 ; 
jewels, 236 ; marquetry, 171 ; monar- 
chies, 13, 71, 72, 98, 109, 150, 157. i66 ; 
period, 70, 8z, 83, 1 14, 127, 130, 134, 141 , 
161, 168, 170, 172, 178, 182, 190, 201, 
206, 213, 233, 236 j vases, 233 ; work, 
135 ; world, 182, 236, 

Helmets, Greek, used by Scythians, 49, 54, 
55, 100; Sarmatian, conical, 121, 129, 
143, 169, adopted by the Chinese, 204 ; 
Sarmato-Roman, 231 ; Roman, 158 ; 
elephant, 204. 

Heracleia Pontka, 63, 68, 71, 82, 148. 

Heracleotes, 63. 

Herakles, 33, 73, 107, 156, 157, 230 ; repre- 
sentations, strangling a ton, 138 ; master- 
ing a boar, 138, 

Hercules cm^xuwfc, 157. 

Hermitage, Museum, 3, 5, 6, 74, 76, 105, 
134, 140, 184, 205, 232. 

Hermonassa, 19, 44, 63, 72. 

Heroa, Mycenaean, 78. 

Herodas, mimes, no. 

Herodotus, 4, 7, 33, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 44, 
45, 60, 64, 65, 83, 84, 95, 96, 104-8, 113, 
157, 212, 213. 

Heroson, 99. 


Heuzey, L. p 77, 192. 

Hierakonpolis, 25, 26. 

Hieroglyphs, Hittite, 167. 234 ; Sarmatian, 
11. Alphabetical signs. 

Hilt3, v. Swords. 

Himncr, 224. 

Hippocrates, pseudo-, 105, 113. 

Histie, 107. 

Histrians, 86. 

Hittite, Asia Minor, 179, 191 ; burials, 31 ; 
civilization, 32 j figures, 58 ; hieroglyphs, 
1671 234 ; horse trappings, 56, 227 ; 
standards, 56 ; works of art, 53. 

Hittites, 34, 

Hoernes, M. ( 32. 

Hogarth, D. G., 57. 

Holland, 138, 140* 

Homer, 167. 

Homeric legends, 37 ; poems, 76. 

Hooks, weapon, 25. 

Horn, drinking, 188 ; v. Khyton. 

Horses, representations, 195 ; dying, 134, 
140, 205 ; attacked by a griffin, 134, 140, 
205 ; by a Hon and a bear, 205 ; catch- 
ing of, 109 ; Przhevalski's or wild ass, 23, 
27, 28. 

Horses buried with the master, 45, 47-9, 54, 
76, 88, 97, 99, 105, 121, 1 25, 232 ; stalls, 
wooden, in the grave chamber, 47, 48 j 
representation of the sacred spike with 
a horse's skull, 105. 

Horse trappings, 227 ; Bosphoran, 167 ; 
Sarmatian, 122, 123, 129, 136, 139, 174, 
182, 184, zo6, adopted by the Chinese, 
204, 205 ; Scythian, 51, 52, 54, 55, 57, 58, 
89,194,195,2^7; Thracian, 88,89; repre- 
sentations, Hittite, 56, 227 ; v. Phalarac ; 
ear-guards, 55, 80 ; frontlets, 52, 55, 89. 
107, 138 ; nasals, 89 ; pectorals, 55 ; 
temple-pieces, 55, 8<j. 

Horsemen, representations, Bosphoran hop- 
lite, 165; Sarmatian, 144, 231, 234; 
Sarmato- Bosphoran. 160, 169,231 ; Scy- 
thian, ii, 40 ; Maeoto-Cimmerian, 40 ; 
Tanaite, 144, 

Hrushevski, M., 238. 

Human figures, clay, 16 ; painted, 25 j 
half human, half leonine, the head 
covered with the elephant helmet, 204 ; 
combined with animals, v. Animals ; 
geometrized, v* Geometrized. 

Hungarian find, 42 ; graves, Scythian, 227. 

Hungary, 8, 18, 40, 42, 92. 

Huns, 119, 186, 203, 217, 218, 219. 


livareno, 105. 

Hydra devouring a goat, 136. 

] lyperboreans, 36. 


Scythian, 52, 57, 97, 99, 102i IIO| 11Jf 

150, 179: religion t 179, 

lazygians, 115, n6, 146. 

Iberia, 116, 118. 

Hmen Lake, 210. 

Ilyints^, find, 97, 104. 

Implements, bronze, 226. 

Imprints, from coins, 171, 174-6, 178, 183, 

184 ; from an Elamitic seal, 27. 
1 nerustation, technique, 50, 135, 172-4, 235 • 
style, painting, 171 ; v. Stones* precious 
and inlay. 
India, 210, 233. 
Indo-European migration, 41 j tribes, 35, 

39 ; type, 60 ; population pre-, 34. 
I ndo- Europeans, 34. 

Inlay, technique, 51, 57-9, 172 ; amber, 50, 
57, 59, 142 ; of the coffins, 76, 171 ; 
coloured. 52, 58, 133, 134, 190 ; enamel, 
142 ; gold, 40 • of jewellery, 236 ; onyx, 
51 ; silver, 59. 
Ionia, 59, 129. 

Ionian animal style, 52, 129, 136, 193, 195, 
201 j art, 24, 49, 59, 139, 20 1 ; character, 
74, 108 ; cities, 72, 79 ; colonies, 55, 62 ; 
geographers, 213 ; Greece, 44, 52 ; 
objects, 108, 196 ; style, 53. 65, t-ji ; 
vases, 3, 63. 
Ionian*, 19, 52, 62, 63, 84, 196. 
Irano-Celtic art, 139, 
Irano-Pontic cult, 104. 
Iron Age, 8, 14,40, 5c 

'34* 206 ; origin, 10 
Istros, 87. 

Italian colonies, 221. 

Italy, 13, 66, 82, 119, 129, 141, 150, 166, 

185, 189, 215, 220, 236. 
Ivan6vski, A., 58. 
Ivory, 25, 26, 27, 226. 

Jade, 204. 
Japan, 199. 
Jars, for oil, 74. 
Jason, 62. 
javelins, 55, 169. 

Jewellery-, h *35. 2 3 6 J Gflthk, 178, 185 ; , icfsh, 24, 

Jewish colonists, 

Jordancs, 219, 
Josephus, 116. 
Justin, 86. 

58, 64, 90, 94, 134, 
61, 225. 

Kafa, 221. 

Kalekapu, tomb, 10. 

Kima, river, 14, 64, 124, 213, 215, 220. 

Kamomta, cemetery, 232. 

Kamunta, cemetery, 232. 

Kaxagodeu&shkh, tumulus, 42, 73, 104, 105, 

no, 226. 
Kareysha, D., 178. 
Kars, 53. 

Kazanskaya Stanitsa, find, 131, 233. 

Ketermea, tumulus. 4, 41, 49-53, 59, 92, 
142, 173, 193, 195, 200, 226. 

Kent, 186, 189. 

Kerch, animal style, 136; Cimmerian 
objects, 40, 41 ; destruction of the 
tumuli, 79 ; enamelled objects, 128, 236 ; 
exploration, 2, 181 ; finds, 131, 187, 188, 
2 3 2 * 2 34» 2 35 ; fortification of die penin- 
sula,^ 160 ; Museum, 2 ; protected 
position, 9 ; Room in the Hermitage, 3 • 
Straits, t8, 37, 6$, 64; t>. Bosphorus 
Straits i Tatars, 221 . ; Vv Panticapaeum. 

Kerkinitis, 64, 

Khanenko, B., 6, 93. 

Kharkov, t7, 29, 140, 225. 

Khatazhukaevski Aul, find, 131. 

Kliazars, 43, 219, 220. 

Kiev, 16, 86, 90, 93, 97, 98, 131, 140, 208, 
210, 215, 319, 220, 230. 

Kievan princedom, 211, 221 ; princes, 216, 
220 ; Russia, 220, 221. 

Kimmerie, 37. 

Kimmerikon, 37. 

Kinaman, 59, 228. 

Kinch, F,, 77. 

Kings, representations, Bosphoran, sitting. 
158 ; riding, 158, 159 ; heads, 158 ; 
Scythian, on horseback, 104, 105 ; stand- 
ing, 104 ; Thracian, on horseback, 138. 
Kir mars, 59. 

Greek^, 44, 5^,54, 65, 74, 76, 78, 1 1 1, «ao, Knives, 175, 177; mountings of stone 
125 ; Greco- Roman, 214 ; Panticapacan, , knives, 24', 26, 27, gold, 175, filigree, 175, 

170, 172-4, 177, T78, 182, 185; Sar 
matian, 14, 124, 125, i 27f 129, 132, 134 

*42* f 73» "74* '8*. 1 86, 202 



KobAn, cemetery, 28, 29, 40, 41, 232. 
Kodiadermen, tumulus, 224, 
Koehlex, H., 6. 

K k 



Koehne, B., 6. 

Komosaryc, name, 68* 

Kondak6v, N,, 5, 7, 185, 238. 

Kore, representations, 73. 

Koscius2ko-\\ r aluzynics, K., 3. 

Kossina, G.„ 1S1, 

KostromskAya, tumukis, 41, 46, 226. 

Koudiat-Zateur, find, 235. 

K{>*}tU t, wall of dressed stone in the tumulus, 

-75: „ 
Ktesias, 84. 

Kuban, region of the river, animal style, 58, 

59, in, 134, 195, 197, 199, 201-3 ; 

Bronze Age, 11 ; cnalcolithic civilisation, 

17 ; Cimmerians in, 42 ; Copper Age, 

19, 21, 22, 28, 30-2, 225 ; economic 

conditions, 18, 162 ; exploration, 4, 5 ; 

finds, Sarmatian, 139-42, 177, 187-9, 

E3> 55. 

a°4' z 3 l 
57i "oz 

1-4, 337, Scythian, 
; Goths in, 119 ; gi 

5 2 . 
9 ; graves, 

irma • 

tian, 126, 128—36, Scythian, 92-4, 99, 
no, 226 ; Greek colonies, 19 ; Maco- 
tiana in, 34, 225 ; metal culture, 15 ; 
fxjlychromy, 132-5, 142, 174, 182, 185 \ 
Sarmatians in, 13, 14, 85, 116, 119, 125, 

M3-S* H7i *5 2 > lu 3> l6 4* Z1 7* 2 * 8 i 

Scythians in, 9, 41-4. 54n 213. 
Kubitsehek, W., 176, 187. 
Kudinetov, find, 185. 
Kul-OM, tumulus, 2, 5, 97, 100, 106, 108- 

ro, 131, 193, 232. 

Kurdzhips, tumulus, 125, 174, 233. 

Iiidoztiskaya, find, 233. 

Laestrygons, 62. 

Laibacli moors, 32. 

Lake or sea engraved, 22, 25, 28. 

Lampsacus, So, 229. 

lances, 121, 123, 125, 129, 143, 169; w. 

Landscape elements, 25, 109, 201 , 205 ; 

t,k Lake, Mountains, Nile, Rivers, Trees, 

Langcron, Comte de, I. 
La Tine period, 82,, 128, 130, 145, 236. 
Latins, 82. 
Latyshcv, V., 6, 7. 
Laufer, B., 203, 204, 237. 
Leaf, Sir Walter, 62. 
Leonhardt, 10. 
Leucon, king, 68—70, 81. 
Lcuton, name, 67. 
Limes, 115. 
Linas, Ch. dc, 167, 181. 

Lingotto, find, 236. 

Lions, representations, 192, 195, 198, 207 ; 
forming an arabesque, 196 ; a circle, 195 ; 
Asa-yro- Persian, sword-hill, devouring a 
goat, 193 ; Babylonian cylinders, fighting 
with a hero, 59 ; Babylon o-PersLan, tomb 
sculpture, 10 ; Chinese, 132 ; Cimmerian, 
two in a heraldic altitude, 40 ; Copper 
Age, engraved, 23, 24, 26, gold, 19, 26 ; 
Olbia, funerary, 167 ; Panticapaean, 
coins, to ; Persian, axe, combined with 
a boar and a goat, 59, seal, fighting 
a king, 123 ; Sarmatian, fibulae, set with 
precious stones, biting its tail, 125, 
concha nt, 18c. t88, lid of a gold perfume 
bottle, 140,01 onyx, 135, phalara, strangled 
by Heraktes, 138 ; Scythian, to, pectoral, 
gold, 50, 51, 59, 195, clasp, bronze, two 
Biting eaen other's tails with a lioness in 
the middle, 52, 134, sword sheath, 
devouring a deer, 201 with reverted 
heads, forming the paws of another lion, 
195, row, composing the tail ot another 
lion, 195 i Sumcria.11 seal, contracted, 
228; heads, 21, 111, 195; Greek 
earrings, 175; paws as feet of a vase, 175, 

Lioness, representations., 52, 137 ; with 
two lions, 52. 

Lipovets, 230. 

AitfoftJAAijru?, AttfM*o\AGr t 236. 

Lithuanians, 222. 

Liverpool Museum, 189. 

Loeper, R, 3. 

Lombard throne, 231 ; style, 190. 

Louvre, Museum, 11, 53, 56, 57, 133, 183, 
193, 230, 234, 237. 

Loveeh, 88. 

Lozengrad, 77. 

Lucian, 109, 168. 

Lucullus, 149. 

Lusatia, 42. 

Lutsenko, E., 4. 

Lycia, 77, 193. 

Lycian artists, 11 1 ; tomb sculpture, in. 

Lydia, 12,36,44, 193, 

Lyaimachus, king, 87. 

Maass, E., 62. 

Mace, 29 ; head, 25 ; as the symbol of a 
deity, 29 J mountings of handles, 26, 27, 

Macedonia, 68, 70, 72, 77, 82, 84-6, 90. 
Macedonian expeditions, 86 ; monarchs, 87. 



Macedonians, 86, 98. 

Maeanders, 199 ; v. Spirals and maeanders, 

Maeotian aristocracy, 157 ; cults, 33, 34, 

178 ; legends, 73, 157 ; queens, 156 ; 

tribes, 33, 34, 10©, 149, 152, 156, 168, 
Maeotians, 12, 33, 34, 39, 42, 65, 68, 107, 

i©8, 153, 156, 166, 168, 235. 
Maeoto-Cimmerian chief, 40. 
Maeotis, 33. 
Maidstone, 189. 
Maikop, 19-31, 50, 56, 134, 140, 142, 185, 

300, 202, 20|. 

Alan gup, kingdom, 9, 218. 

Mannaeans, 35, 

Mantle of leather or fur, 123. 

Marchcleput, find, 236* 

IV lard uk, 29. 

Marquetry, z>. Inlay. 

Marsagetes, prince, 84. 

Marscuks, 82. 

Marshall, F., 189. 

Maryiinskaya, tumulus, 41, 226. 

Mask, Funerary, gold, 174 ; Queen of the 

mask, zk Queen. 
Masssgetians, 41, 226. 
Massilia, 236. 
Matriarchy, 33, 34, 113. 
Mats, 47. 
Mattress, 45. 
Maximtan, 183. 
Maximin, 119. 
Mayer, Collection, 189. 
Medallions, gold, 175 ; engraved on a glass 

vase, 233. 
Medes (Madai), 35, 36, 60, 83, 114, 
Mediterranean, 1 a, 43, 61, 70* 
Medusa, 108 ; head, 54. 
MeleVChesrne, tumulus, 77, 
Metgunov's tumulus, 42, 49-51, 92, 200, 

Merajany, find, 105, 106, no, 11 1. 
Meroe, 236. 
Merovingian art, 188 ; brooches, 236 ; 

France, 186; style, 178, 191,202. 
Mesambria, 229. 
Mesopotamia, animal style, 31, 192, 197 ; 

Copper Age, 19, 22, 26, 28, 32 ; copper 

supply of, 18 ; influence on Scythians, 

54, 55, 59, 208 ; neolithic pottery, 15 ; 

polycnromy, 172 ; weapons as symbols of 

deities, 29 ; world empire, 36* 
Messaksudi, Collection, 234. 
Metal epochs, 15. 
Metope style of decoration, 16. 

K k 

Metropolitan Museum in New York, 199, 

205, 234, 236. 
Meyer, Mrs. R, Collection, 199, 200. 
Middle Ages, 5, 1%%, 134, 169, i 73 , ,&„ 

Migtilinskaya Stanitsa, find, 135, 140, 142, 

2 3 2 - 
Mikhalkovo, find, 40, 41, 226. 

Milesian colonies, 12, 63-5, 169 ; legends, 

Milesians, 18, 43, 62, 64-6. 
Miletus, 63, 66, 109, 228. 
Miller, A., 124, 143. 
Miller, V., 144, 168. 
Minns, E., 7, 55, 60, 205. 
Minoan epoch, 61, 
Minussinsk, 197, 202, 237. 
Mirrors, 132 ; Greek, 175 ; Sarmatian, 187, 

204, 234 ; Scythian, 50, 227. 
Mithra, 11, representations, 104, 105. 
Mithridates VI (I), Eupator, the Great, id, 

70, 116, 136, 148-53, 156, 157, 159, 163. 
Mithridates VII (II), son of Aspurgos, 153, 

, 57; I 03* 164, 166. 
Mithridates of Pergamon, 151. 
Mithridates, Mount, 75, 170. 
Mbtellenes, 65. 
Models, clay, of a wagon* It, 22, 161, 224 ; 

of a house, 124 ; of a dwelling aica on 
piles, 224. 

Moesia, 155 ; Lower, 1 17, 1 1 8. 

Mongolian, kingdom, 221 ; invaders, 9, 
2i 8 ; theory of the origin of the Cim- 
merians, 225, of the Scythians, 60, 228 ; 
tribes, 43, 114, 115, 117, 120, aig, 220 ; 

type, 4°- 
Mongolians, 14, 38, 43, 222. 
Monograms, Greek, 176 ; Sarmatian, badge 

like, 167, 176, 177 ; v. Alphabetical signs. 
Mordvinov's tumulus, v. Black Valley. 
Morgan, J. de, 57. 
Morgan, J- P., Collection, 236. 
Mosaic, Alexander, from Pompeii, 1 1 1 . 
Moscow, 221 ; Archaeological Society, 6. 
Mother Goddess, v. Goddess, Great, 
Moult, 187. 
Mounds, 45, 170, 

Mountains, representations, 22, 25, 28. 
Mountings, of knives, 24, 26, 27, 175 ; of 

mace handles, 26, 27, 30 ; of rhyta, 53, 

174, 232, 233 ; of vases. 232, 233. 
Mounts, strap, inscribed, 167. 
Mueller, 163. 
Mules, heads, 56. 



MuHenhofT, K., 60. 

Munsterberc, R., 199, 200. 

Mural paintings, v. Paintings. 

Mycenaean influence, 32, 61 ; period, 79 ; 
tombs, 77, 78 ; world, 193. 

Mycenaeans, 61* 

Mythological representations, 7, 97, 99, 102, 
»ji 107, 1 08, 136, 149, 150, 171, 186, 
188 ; v. Religious scenes and gods. 

Mytilene, 63, 116. 

Mytileneans, 65. 

Nagy, Gcza, 60. 

Naksh-i-Rustam, 55, 229. 

Naramsin, king, 25. 

N(fi3*tAfljf0if, 235. 

Necklaces, 21, 30, 31, 76, 79, 100, ill, 175, 

177, 182, 187. 
Nckrasovskaya Staiutsa, find, 131. 
Nemlrov, gnrodiahche, 90, 230, 
Neolithic Age, 5, 8, 15-17, 32, 90, 94, 122, 

191, 224. 
Nergal, 29. 

Nero, 117, 118, 141, 153, 154- 
Ncrva, 215. 
Neumann, K„ 6. 
Nezhin, 185. 

Nik6pol Room in the Hermitage, 3. 
Nile, representations, 25. 
Nimes Museum, 108. 
Nimrud, 57. 
Ntnib, 29. 
Ninnus, 36, 226, 
Nordendorf, find, 187, 
Normandy, 131, 187. 
Norsemen, 210. 
Norway, 207. 
N6vgorod, 219, 220. 
Novocherkassk, treasure, 4, 13, 131, 135, 

140-2, 174, 177, 178, 18*, 232, 233. 
Novokorsunskaya Stamtsa, find, 234. 
Novorossijsk (Bata), 63. 
Novosclki, tumulus, 97, 230, 
Nubia, 26, 27. 
Nymphaeum, 4, 52, 54, 64, 67, 76, 78, 79, 

167, 229, 237. 

Oath, sacred, v. Communion, 

'Qfttkol (copper points), 30 

Odessa, i, 17, 140 ; Archaeological Society, 

6 ; Museum, 2. 
Odobesco, A., 105, 181, 186, 233. 
Odrysian kings, 157 j state, 85, 89, 90, 230. 

Odrysians, 85. 

Odyssey, 36, 62, 228. 

Oguz, tumulus, 95. 

Olca, river, 213, 220, 221. 

Otbia, archaic, 228 ; cemeteries, 82, 229 ; 

econtimic conditions, 12, 44, 63-5, 69, 94, 
99, 111, 146, 162, 163, 170 ; excavations, 
3 i finds, 97, 140, 142, 177, 233 ; Gaufc 
in, 70 ; Getians in, 116, 120 ; Goths in, 
119, 120, 2l6, 217 ; Greek character, 74, 
165, 167 ; Iranian names, 60 ; political 
conditions, 70, 86, 87, 96, no, 1 16-20, 
'54. "55* **h~Q '* Pontic garrisons, 149 ; 
Roman garrisons, 155. 234 ; Sarmatians in, 
119, 120; Thradans in, 145, 

Onyx, 51, 129, 135. 

Openwork technique, 52, 57, 58, 133, 134, 
142, 167, 174, 182, 186, 190, 227, 233. 

OreJihovo, 138. 

Orenburg, 85, 122-6, 129, 132, 145, 174, 

Oreshnikov, A., 157. 

Orleans, 236. 

Ornaments personal, Bronze Age, 40. 

Orphism, 179. 

Osebcrg, 207. 

Ossetian language, 114 ; names, 168, 

Ossetes, 1 14, 144, 218. 

Ostrogoths, 2i 8. 

Ovid, 165, 169. 

Oxen, representations, 19, 21, 195; v. 

Oxus, treasure, 133, 140, 174. 

Oxyrhynchus papyrus, 18. 

Paintings, mural, houses, 81, 171 ; tombs, 
81, 82, 136, 160, 161, 169, 170, 171, 179, 

Pairisades I, king, 69, 81. 

Pairisades III, king, 69. 

Pairisades, name, 67. 

Palaeolithic Age, 5, 32, 191, 192. 

Palettes, stone, Egyptian, 24-7, 

Palmettes, 54, 196, 207. 

Pan, representations, 80. 

Panagurishte, tumulus, 88, 89, 137, 138. 

Panathenaic vases, 3, 54. 

Panoply, Scythian, 48, 55. 

Panthers, representations, 23, 24, 27, 137 ; 
handles, 186. 

Panticapaeum, arms, 10, 80 ; art, 82, 100- 
n, 140 ; artistic school, 53, 80, 135, 142, 
164, 165, 172, 231 ; the Byzantine epoch, 
217; Cimmerians in, 37, 64, 66, 67; 



coins, 228 ; cults, 72, 73, 107, 108, 
,0 5t >79i *34 » economic conditions, 
12, 44, 64, 66, 68-70, 78* 162. 2341 
exploration, 1, 3 ; funerary ritual, 76 ; 
Goths in, 184, 185, 217 ; influence on 
Scythian art, 97, in; Iranian names, 
60, 168 ; Milesians in, 43, ; name of, 80, 

1 58 ; origin of, xS ; political conditions, 
12, 66-9, 82, 85, 143, 149, 150, 154, 155, 
165, 167 ; polychrome style, 14, 172-4, 
178, 181, 235 ; representations of the 
life in, 160, 161, 165, 169, 171 ; Sarmatkn 
alphabetical signs, 130, 167, 234 ; Banna' 
dans in, 120 ; Sarmatization 01, 141, 155, 
167-9, 178, 183, '84; similarity with 
Asia Minor, TO, 1 1 , 68 ; Slavs in, 219 ; 

tombs, 75* 77. 7^. »»°* i7«» *7*i »74> »77- 
229; wall paintings, 81 1 160, 10 1, 231, 

234; weapons, 129, 204; v, Kerch. 
Papaios, 107. 

Paphlagonia, 10, 11, 80, 82, 150, 193, 
Paradise, representation, 28. 
Parthenos, 34,, 72, 148, 
Parthia, 13, 115, 118, 202, 203. 
Parthian advance, 154 ; art, 136, 202, 206 ; 

campaign of Caesar, 151 ; kingdom, 118, 

159 ; monuments, 171. 
Parthians, 85, n6, 121, 153. 

Pastes, coloured, 178, 182, 190; v. Inlay. 

Paterae, gold, 88. 102, ill, 138, 186. 

Pausanias, 113. 

Pearls, 135. 

Pechenegi, 43, 220. 

Pectorals, breast-pieces, 50-5. 59- 

Peloptifinese, 82, 228, 

Peloponnesian war, 12, 68. 

Pendants, 58, 102, 125, 135. 

Pergamon, 68, 109, 151. 

Periciean Athens, 13. 

Pericles, 67, 68, 

Perm, 206, 207, 237. 

Persephone, 179. 

Persia. 10, 12, 83, 98, 149, 229. 

Persian alphabetical signs, 167 ; art, 50 
55, 59, 6o, 197, 201, 236 ; artabai, 162 
axes, 58, 5Q, 228 ; conquests, 83, 84 
influence, 182 ; jewels from graves, 134 
140 ; king, 85 * kingdom, 9, 44, 66, 123 
language, 114; power, 84; seals, 122, 
123 ; wars, 06; work, 123, 133, 

Persians, 10, 36, 60, 83, 84, ill, 114, 229. 

Petersburg, St,, Archaeological Society, 6. 

Felroasa (Petrossa), treasure, 106, 134. 138, j 
186-8, 232, 235- 

Phalarae, Assyrian, 130 ; Bulgarian, (37, 
•3^» 2 33 : Greek, 136 i Sarmatian, 129, 
136-9, 146, 186, 188 , 203, 232 ; Scythian, 
52 ; v. Horse trappings, 

Phanagoria, 3, 4, 19, 33, 43, 44, 63, 67, 69, 
72, 149, 158, 161, 164, 168, 218, 228. 

Pharnaees I, king of Pontus, 148. 

Phamaces II, son of Mithridates. 150, 151, 

Phasis, river, 61. 128. 

Phialai, 48, 106, 1 28, 193. 

Philip, king of Macedonia, 84, 86, 90. 

Phihppopofis, 88. 

Phoenicia, 193. 

Phoenician glass, 74. 

Phrygia, 193. 

Pilaster, bronze, 175, 

Pile dwellings, 30 ; model, 224. 

Pins, 22, 31, 175. 

Piraeus, 68. 

Pitt-Rivers Collection, 26. 

Plants, painted, 171. 

Plaques, Assyro-Persian, 122 ; Boephoran, 
80, J 75. ; Caucasian, 227 ; Egyptian, 24, 
27 ; Eiamitic, 24 ; Lombard, 231 j 
Roman, 233 ; Sarmatian, 133, garment, 
122, 124, 125, 130, 131, 135, 140, 146, 
175. *77i 178. 182, 184, 187, 234, 
triangular attached to vases, 188 ; Sar- 
mato-Chinesc, 205 ; Scythian, 52, 07, 
garment, 50,53, 56, 58, 73. 75. 95,07, 102, 
105-8, 130, triangular from a tiara, 104, 
attached to vases, 188 ; Siberian, 13, 140, 
202, 203, 205, 233, found in China, 237 ; 
Susiaft, 27 ; Transcaucasian, 58, 134 ; 
V, Horse trappings and Phalarae. 

Plates, silver, 175, 176, 236, 

Plato, 167. 

Plautiua Silvanus, 117, 163. 

Pliny, 154. 

Podolia, 17, 90, 97, 230. 

Pohl Museum, EkatcrinoslSv, 131. 

Pokrovka, tumulus, 122, 123, 124. 

Polemon, king, 152, 154. 

Poles, 48-50, 56, 97. 99 ; tof». n. 40. 3<>» 
52, 56, 59, in, 199 ; v. Rods, Standards, 
and Rattles. 

Poles, 222. 

Polish state, 215, 

Pdlovtsy, 43, 220. 

Poltava, 42. 5*» 86* 9°» 96. 97* 2l 5i 23°- 
Polyacnus, 33. 
Polybius, 114, 162. 

Polychrome style, 14, 133, 141, 172-4, 177, 
178, 181-3, 185, i86, 189-91, 235, 236. 

2 54 


Polychromy, 52, 124, 125, 128, 132-5, 140-2, 

172, 173, 182, 188, 189, 202. 
Poly crates, 228. 
Pommels, v. Swords. 
Pompeii, mosaic, in, 
Pompeian, pre-, system of mural decoration, 


Pompetus Tragus, 86. 

Pompcy, 116, 149, 150, 157. 

Pontic civilization, 10; coins and sculp- 
tures, 104; coast land, 153; letters of 
Ovid, 165 ; origin of graves, 170 ; trade, 
229 ; Greeks, 147 ; Scythians, 60. 

Ponto-Cappadocian style, 57. 

n<(nof (n©pn<cos'), 235, 

Pontus, analogies with S. Russia, II, 136 ; 
cult of the Great Goddess r 73, 162 ; 
legendary, 62 ; monarchy in, 13, 68, 71 ; 
political conditions, U7, 148-50, 152, 
154, 162 ", Scythians in, io ; tombs; 77, 

Poroina, find, 86, 105, 106, 232. 

Portraits, of Alexander the Great, 204 ; of 
Bosphoran citizens, 169 ; of Bactrian 
and Tibetan kings, 204. 

Poseidon, 107, 156, 157 ; S«wfn»«, 157 

Posidonius, 139, 145. 

Potnia Theron, Hot via Srjpm; v. Goddess, 

Pottery, neolithic, incised, 16, 17, 225, 
painted, 15, 16, 224, spiral and macander, 
5, 16, 17, 90, 91, rrip61ye type, i6 p 
Egyptian prc-dynastic, 25, 28, Susian, i6 t 
51, 191 ; from the graves with con- 
tracted skeletons! 90, 91 ; chalcolithic, 
5, 15, 17 ; Bronze Age, Hungarian, 
92, Trojan, 92, Transcaucasian, 29, 40 ; 
Hallstatt, 92 ; Middle Dnieper, 91-4 ; 
La Tene period, 145 ; Sarmatian, 5th 
cent., 123 ; Scythian, 4th cent., 95 ; 
Greek, 120, 164, 7th cent., 44, 93, 
6th cent,, 44, 63, 65, 78, Attic, 54, 
Hellenistic, 3 ; Greco-Roman, 214 ; 
Roman, 3 ; *\ Vases. 

Poulsen, F., 57* 

Priam, treasure, 30. 

Pridik, E., 50, 140, 176. 

Prinz, H,, 10. 

Pripet, river, 213, 221. 

Prokhorovka, tumulus, 123, 124. 

Propontis, 228. 

Protogenee, 70, 87, 99. 

Prussia, 42, 49. 

Psalia, ^ciAta, 129. 

Psel, river, 96* 

tyvKrifp ilapfiafnKds ArfJoKoAAoc, 236, 

Ptolemaic Egypt, 70. 

Ptolemies, 70, 236. 

Ptolemy, the geographer, 162, 213, 216, 219. 

Putazky, 188. 

Pupienu?, 183. 

Purses, ' lake-dwellers ', 30 ; red leather, 


Pythodoris, 152, 

Pythodorus, 152. 
Pyxis, silver, 175. 

Queen with the Golden !\ task, grave, 13 1 , 

Quivers, 40, 46, 55, 100, 129, 160. 

Radyuvene, find, 88. 

Raermond, find, 138, 232. 

Ramman-Adad, 29. 

Rams, representations, 177 ; head, 203. 

Rattles, 11, 48, 49, 52, 50, 97, 99, 204; 

v. Pole tops ana Standards. 
Raven, representation, 108. 
Read, Sir Hercules, 59, 205. 
Rdnach, S,, 6, 58, 136, 139. 
Reindeer, 54 ; representations, 195, 197 ; 

heads, 195. 
Reinecke, P., 181 , 204, 205. 
Reliefs, 55, hi, 144, 229, 231. 
Religious scenes, Asia Minor, 111 ; flos- 

phoran, 160, 179 ; Sarmatian, 137, 138, 

186 \ Scythian, 89, 104-6, 108, 1 1 1, 1^0 ; 

Thracian, 89, 105, 106, 138 ; v. Mytho- 

logical representations. 
Repousse technique, 177, 185, t88, 189, 

233 ; if. Embossed. 
Rhescuporis II, king, 175-8, 183, 184, 187, 

Rhescuporis, name, 156. 

Rhine, river, 185, 189, 214. 

Rhodes, 70, 147. 

Rhoemetalccs, name, 156. 

Rhyton.48,49, 53,86, 104-6,111,188,232 ; 

mountings, 53, 174, 232, 233 ; ends in 

the form of animals, 53, 105. 
Ribbons, ornamental motive, 198, 199, 
Richelieu, Due dc, 1. 
Riegl, A., 173, 181. 
Rings, 19, 30, 88, 89, 175 ; engraved, 105, 

230 ; string of, 30 ; as units of exchange. 

Rivers, engraved, 23, 25, 28. 
Robillard dc Beaurepaire, E. de, 187, 



Rochette, Raoul-, 2. 

Rods, gold or silver, 19, 20, 30 ; p. Sceptres 

and Poles. 
Roessler, A., 58. 
Rohde, E„ 37. 
Romanesque art, 208. 
Romny\ 97. 
Roof of the grave chamber, of mats, 45 ; 

stone, 170, flat, 2i, gabled, 21 ; wooden, 

19, conical, 47, gabled, 47. 
Rosettes, 19, 20, 21, 23, 26, 31, 49, 51. 

Rostahm, 107. 
Rost6v, 219. 
Rouen Museum, 189. 
Roundels, v. Horse trappings. 
Roxalans or White Alans, 115, 11 6, 146. 
Rudenko, 123. 
Rugs, 47. 

Rumania, 16, 42, 88, 90, 105, 138, 186. 
Runes, 186, 
Rusas II, king, 35. 
Ryzhanovka, tumulus, 97, 230. 

Sabatier, J., 2, 

Sahaziasts, 179, 

Sabazios, 180, 

Sabbathiasts, 179, 180. 

Sacians, 10, 60, 83, 114, 197, 229, 

Eaitapharnes, king;, 871 136. 

Sakaia, religious festival, 10. 

Sakasene, id, 36, 83. 

Sakastan, 107. 

Sakerdians, 35. 

Salin, B„, 181, 207. 

Salmanovo, tumulus, 225. 

Salonica, 13, 77, 119, 169. 

Samara, 122. 

Samian coins, 79. 

Samnites, 82, 

Samokvasov, D., 93. 

Samos, 228. 

Sanctuaries of the Great Goddess, v. God- 

dess. Great* 
Sandaratians, 87. 
San. das, 180, 234. 
Sdvrj ,234. 

Sanerges, 179, 180, 234. 
Saneunos, 18. 
Saratov, 125. 
Sarcophagi, stone, 170; stone, painted, 

171 •, marble, 174 ; incrusted, 172, 235 ; 

of Alexander the Great, in. 
Sardinia, 193. 

Sargon II, 3c. 

Sassanid alphabetical signs, 234 ; art, 130 ; 
gems, 104 ; monuments, 171 ; Persia, 
191, 202 ; Persians, 121. 

Satyrs, representations, 73, 80, 180 ; heads, 
80, 109. 

Satyros I, king, 68, 69. 

Satyros II, king, 145, 163, 166. 

Satyros, name, 67. 

Sauromates II, king, 184. 

Sauromates, name, 156. 

Sauromatians, 33,34, 39, 107, 113, 144, 156, 

Sayce, A., 167. 

Scabbards, Chinese, 204 ; Lombard, 236 ; 
Scythian, 50, 55, 200 ; v. Swords. 

Scandinavia, 206, 213. 

Scandinavian art, 208 ; chieftains, 219 ; 
countries. 206. 

Scenes of life, of Asia Minor, 11 1 ; Cim- 
merian, warriors, 40 ; Greek, athletic 
contests, 54 ; Panticapaean, 17*, battles, 
»6o, 161, 169, soldiers, 165, 169, idyllic, 
160,161 ; Parthian, hunters and warriors, 
206; Scythian, 97, 104, 108, 109, 11 1, 149, 
catching horses, 109, hunting, 108, camp, 

108, 109, battles, 108, warriors, 40, too, 

109, racial representations, 108, 109 ; 
v. Religious scenes. 

Sceptres, 29, 30, 56, 88, 100, 105, 159, 175 ; 

with the bust of a Roman Emperor, 158 ; 

v. Poles and Rods. 
Schiefner, A., 60. 
Schmidt, H , 16. 
Schiircr, E., 180. 
Scirians, 87, 1 16. 
Scla veiies, 219. 
Scopaic art, 109. 
Scordiscans, 139. 
Scorpion, king, 25- 
Scrioonius, 151, 152. 
Sculptures, Assyro-Persian, 1 1 ; I*ycian, 

in ; Panticapaean, 171 ; Paphlagonian, 

10, 11,80; Pontic, 104; Sinjirli, 58. 
Scylax, pscudo-, 114, 143. 
Scythia Taurica, 154. 
Scytho-Assyrian style, 51. 
Seals, 175 ; Elamitic, 24, 27 ; Persian, 122, 

engraved, 123 ; Sumcrian, 25, 228. 
Seistan, 115. 
Seleucus 1, 236* 
Semites, 34. 
Semitic countries, 182 ; gods, 234 ; pre- 

Semitic population, 34. 


Sennacherib, 35. 

Serbia, 22©. 

Serogozy, tumulus, 95, 102 


Serpents, representations, 139 ; v. Snakes ; trib«js, 5, 98, 210. 

Slavonic antiquities , 14 ; country, 42 ; 
culture, 221 ; federation, 219 ; race, 211, 
222 ; Russia, 238 ; states, 218, 220 ; 

serpent-footed, 73, 107, 108. 
Sesostris, 36, 226. 
Sevastopol, 17. 

Slavs, 146. 218, 2*9, 222. 
Sledges, funerary, 207. 
Srnela, 5, 6. 

Seven Brothers, tumulus, 4, 52 4, 78, 122., Snakes, representations, 28, 193, 198, 200 ; 

v. Serpents, 
Sofia, 220, 
Sol6kha, tumulus, 5, 10, 40, 60, 95, 99-101, 

103, 106, 108, 109, 111, 188, 193, 20J, 

230, 231, 
Sophia, S., 220, 
Spain, 13, 82, 119, 141, 151, 186, 220, 

Spanish polychrome style, 191 . 
Spartocid period, 159, 105, 169, 171 ; 

tradition, 170. 
Spartocids, 85, 156, 15* 

140, 188, 20 1, 226, 237 
Seven, 155. 

Severus, Ssptimius, 154, 215. 
Sheaths, v. Swords. 
Sheep, representations, 192, 195, 
Shields, 46, 158, 169, 184. 
Ships, painted, 25 ; funerary, 207. 
Shirt, bronze, 55. 
Shuganiuna, 29. 
Shumen, 224. 

Shume^ko's farm, tumulus, 42, 51, 227. 
Siberia, animal style, 58, 178, 197, 201-3, 

237 ; Assyrian influence on, 56, 197 ; Spartocos I, Ring, 67, o#, 70 

commercial relations with S. Russia, 213 ; Spartocos III, king, 69. 

Iranian tribes in, 115 ; objects from, 11, 

139-43, 186, 232 j polychrome style, 174, 

177, 182, 190 ; Roman coins and objects 

in, 141, 215 ; Sarmatians in, 121, 143, 

Siberian art, 202, 207 ; rinds, 141, 186 ; 

jewellery, 134. 135, 202 ; plaques. 13, 

140, 202, 203, 205, 233. 
Sicily, 68, 71. 

Siebenbrunnen, find, 176, 187, 235. 
Signatures of artists, 74, 76, 135. 
Silens, representations, 73, 80, 180 ; heads * 

73, 80, 109. 
Simferopol, 42, 52, 117, 137, 163, 226. 
Sindian princes, 68. 
Sindians, 12, 33, 34, 39, 40, 65, 66, 68. 
Sinjirli, 58. 

Spartocos, name, 67, 

Spears, 29, 30, 41,45, 55, 158, 160, 175, 177. 

204 ; v. Lances ; as symbol of a deity, 

29 ; heads, 24, 29, 46. 
Sphinxes, representations, 192, 207. 
Spikes, decorated with human figures, 22 ; 

sacred with a horse J s skull, representation, 

Spiral, beads, 31 ; and maeander patterns, 

198-200 ; pottery, 5, 16, 17, 90, 91. 
Spitsyn, A., 90, 136. 
Spoons, silver, 175. 
Spurs, 143. 
Stags, representations, 137, 193, 195, 

Standards, 49, 52, 56, 59, 195, 227 ; v* 

Poles and Rattles. 

Sinope, 10, 62, 63, 67, 82, 162, 228, ' Starobelsk, find, 136-8. 


i] aui-ntvs, 235. 

Siracians, 116, 120, 145, 163, 164. 

Eipaxutv, 163. 

Siren with a lyre, representation, 138. 
Siverskaya Stanitsa, find, 136, 137, 139, 188, 

189, 232. 
Skadovski, G., 65, 
Skeletons, contracted, painted red, ». 

Skiluros, king, 148, 163, 231. 
Skorpil, V., 167, 
Skyles, king, 65, 1 10. 
Skythene, to, 36, 83. 

Staromysh&stovskaya Stanitsa, find, 21, 23, 

27. 3<>- 
Stasov, V., 7, 136. 
Staters, gold, io, 79, 80, 
Statues, funerary, 144, 
Statuettes, clay, female, 22, 31, 32; gold, 

from Siberia, 142. 
Stavr6pol, find, 125, 132, 138, 187, 231. 
Stelai, funerary, 165, 168, 169, 171, 204 ; 

painted, 170, 171 ; of Naramsin, 25. 
Stephani, L., 6, 53, 73, 176. 
Stephanus of Byzantium, 18. 
Stem, E. von, 3, 7, 16, 40, 64, 65, 178, 181, 




Stirrups, iai,. 130. 

Stones, precious, engraved, 234, and signed 
by artists, 76 ; inset, 14, 57, 125, 128, 
129, 132-5. 142. 173, 174, 177. 178, 182, 
184, 186-90, 232, 23 3 , 235, and cut to 
the required shape* 173, 184, 185, 190 ; 
v. Gems. 

Strabo, 37-9, 115, 116, 139, 160, 162 

Straps, 56 ; mounts, inscribed, 167. 

Stratocleia, 67. 

Strigils, 74. 

Strips of gold, 19. 

Structures, funerary, neolithic, suggesting 
3 Roman columbarium, 16 , 17 ; stone 
of the dolmen type, 21, 28, 

Stuffs, Greek imported, 44 ; in the tombs, 

Siulik, 221. 

Suevians, 119. 

Sula, 96. 

Sumer, 27, 28, 31, 198. 

Sumerian art, 57, 193, 198, 236 ; monu- 
ments, 27, 30 ; period, 192 ; seal, 228. 

Sumerian Babylon, 59. 

Susa, 15, 16, 27, 51, 57, 58, 133, 134, 140, 
174, 191, 227. 

Suuk-Su, find, 185. 

Svyatoal^v, zzo. 

Swan, grasped by an eagle, gold, 140. 

Sweden, 207. 

Swedes, 222. 

Switzerland, 30, 

Swords, Assyrian, 129 ; Bronze Age, 29 ; 
Chinese, 120, 204 ; Gothic, 184 ; Iranian. 
102 ; Middle Dnieper, 90 ; Roman, 158 ; 
Sarmatian, 121, 123, 129, 143, 169, 175, 
184, 204, 234 ; Scythian, 55', 100, 227 ; 
sword-sheaths, Sarmatian, 125, 129, 174 ; 
Scythian, 52, 58, 100, 104, 201 ; hilts, 
Assyrian, 129 ; Assyro-Persian, 193, 237 ; 
Sarmatian, 129 i guards, Chinese, stone, 
204 ; Sarmatian, stone, 129, 169, 204 ; 
Scythian, gold-plated, 100 ; pommels, 
Assyrian, 129 \ Chinese, 204 ; Sarma- 
tian, 129, 169, 204 ; Transcaucastan, 58 ; 
o. Daggers and Scabbards. 

Syracuse, 68, 71. 

Syria, 141, 171, 172, 182,189,236; North, 

Syrian garnet, 177 ; polychrome style, 189, 

190, 236. 
Synscos, 148. 
Szilagy-Somlyo. find, 185, 187, 1S8, 235. 


Tabid, 107. 

Tablets, proto-Elamitic, 27. 

Tacitus, 13, 113, 163, 144, 

Taganrog, find, 136, 185. 

Tam4n peninsula, Bosphoran, 160, 162; 
Cimmerians in, 37, 39, 40, 65, 226 ; 
cults, 33, 72, 73, 8c, 107; economic 
conditions, 162, 164; exploration, 3, 4; 
Goths in, 119, 218 ; Greco-Cimmerian 
population, 13 ; Greco-Scythian tombs, 
75-81 ; Greek colonies, 44, 62, 65, 66, 
68, 118, 119; protected position, 9; 
Sarmatians in, 119, 136, 145, 147, 160, 
232 ; Sarmatization, 125, 172, 174. 

Tana is, 39, 60, 69, 85, 119, X20, 135, 
142-4/ 146, »54, 164, 165, 1 68, 204, 

Tanajte reliefs, 144 ; names, 144. 

Tanattes, 144, 

Taplow Barrow, 188, 

Tarnovski, 5, 

Tapovhas i-RQi«t, 135. 

Tarsus, 234. 

Tatars, 43, 221, 222; Mountain Tatars, 

Taurians, 34, 39, 64, i6o, 161, 169. 

Taurida, 87, 97, no, 136, 230, 233, 

Tauro- Scythians, 163, 

Tetans, 43, 65. 

Tclcphos, myth, 125. 

Tello, 23, 24, 30. 

Temir-Gori, grave, 40, 226. 

Tent of nomadic type, painted, 160 ; tent- 
shaped graves, v. Graves. 

Teos, 63 , 228. 

Terra sigillata, 128, 214. 

Tersk, 185, 

Tctraxite Goths, e. Goths, 

Teuspa, name, 39. 

Thagimasadas, 107. 

Thates, river, 163. 

Theiss, river, no. 

Themiscyra, 33. 

Theocritus, 109 no. 

Theodosia, 3, 12, 64, 67, 69, 76, 79, 164, 

Theophanes of Mytilene, it 6. 
&*fc "T^urros, 179, 180, 
Thermodon, river, 61. 
Thessaly, 236. 
Thisamatiana, 87. 
Tholos, 77. 
Thothorses, king, »%. 

2 5 8 


Thrace, animal style, 89 ; Cimmerians in, 
38 ; coins, 158 ; com trade, 70 ; political 
conditions, 84, 85, 87* 145, 151 ; Scy- 
thians in, 83-0. 

Thradan dynasty in the Bosphonjs, 68, 1 57 ; 
elements in the Bosphoran population, 
39, 156, 1 68, 180 ; god, 80, 180 ; graves, 
76-8, 8a, 88, 89 ; names, 12, 13, 39, 67, 
68, 135, 144, 153, 156, 168, 226, 234 -, 
objects, 89, 330 *, origin of the Cim- 
merians, 13, 39 ; plain, 107 ; population, 
71, 82, 87, 139 ; princes, 89, 186 ; prin- 
cess, 156 ", religion, 105, 179 ; tribes, 13, 
[.i» 77, 90, 94, 1 16, J 17, 149; tumuli, 77, 
«, 88, 229, 230. 

Thracians, 9, 39, 41, 67, 70, 90, 9*1 108, 118, 
144, 145, 168, 180, 213, 222. 

Thraco-Cimmerian population, 11. 

Thrace-Iranian foundation, 13 ; dynasty, 
153 I costume, 169. 

Thuhurbo Majus, find, 12,1, 235. 

Thunderbolt, representation, 29. 

Thyrsi, silver, 232. 

Tiara, 97, 102, 104, 105, 234 ; of cloth or 
felt, 20. 

Tiberius Julius, name, 158. 

Tibetan kings, portraits, 204, 

Tiesenhausen, B. von, 4. 

Tiflisskaya Stanitsa, tumulus, 127, 131, 136, 
232, 233. 

Tigers, representations, 198 ; with reverted 
heads, 200 ; heads, 199, 200. 

Timoshevskaya, find, 233. 

Tirgatao, queen, 33, 156. 

Titorovskaya, find, 233. 

Tmutarakan, 219.. 

Toilet articles, 24, 26, 30, 74- 

Tolstoy\ Ct. I., 5, 7, 185, 

Tomakovka, tumulus, 42, 52, 173, 226. 

Tomaschek, W., 60. 

Tombs, carved, 10, 167, 170, 171 ; family, 
170; painted, 25, 75, 77, 8i, 82, 136, 
160, 161, 167-71, 179, tSo. 231, 234 ; 
stones, 167, 168 ; v. Graves. 

Tomi, 86, 165, 169. 

Tores, Sarmatian, 124, 125, 132, 138, 177, 
182, 184, 186, 187, 233 ; Scythian, 100 ; 
Siberian, 140, 142. 

Toreutic, xo, 11, 8i, 82, 109, 133, 

Trjrki, 43- 

Toronto, Museum, 233. 

Toys, 170. 

Trajan, 118, 154 ; column, 13, 169 

Trajanic period, 159, 

Tralles, 152. 

Transcaucasia, 18, 28, 29, 38, 40, 58, 65, 83, 

Transcaueasian mines, 19, 62 ; pottery, 29, 
40 , tombs, 58. 

Trebizond, 19, 62, 63, 220. 

Trees, representations, 22, 24, 25, 28, 160. 

Treidler, H., 60. 

Trerians, 39. 

Triballiaiis, 86. 

Trinkets, 74, 227. 

Tripolye type of pottery, 16. 

Tristta of Qvid, 165. 

Triumph of Dionysos, representation, 137. 

Triumphal types on Bosphoran coins, 158 

Trojan pottery, 92. 

Troy, 30, 31,40, 61. 

Tsaritsyn, 125. 

Tsaxskaya Stanitsa, tumulus, 21, 24, 31. 

Tsarski, tumulus, 77, 79. 

Ts'in dynasty, 114. 

Tsukur, 72. 

Tsvetna (Zvetna), find, 131, 140, 232. 

Tsymbalka, tumulus, 95, 107, 138. 

Tube for perfume, 135. 

Tumuli, excavations, 2-5, 13, 44, 45, 88, 
95, 122, 123 ; Asia Minor, 77, 82 j 
Bronze Age, 28, over graves with con- 
tracted skeletons, 17, 90 ; Copper Age, 
19, zi ; Etruscan, 77» 82 I Greek, 75-9, 

81, 82, 170, 174, 176, 177 ; Greco- 
Scythian, 76, 78, 81 ; Macedonian, 77, 
82 ; Middle Dnieper, 92, 230 ; Neo- 
lithic, 224. 225, 230 ; Pontic, 10 ; Sar- 
matian, 4, 13, 122-4, 126-9, l 4°» M 2 J 
Scythian, 4, 5, to, 11, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 

49» 5 a 5« 59* 7 6 > 9*» 95' 97» 99* IOO » i°4~7» 
no, 115, 122, 124, 230 j Thracian, 77, 

82, 88, 229* 230 ; v. Graves and Tombs. 
Tunic embroidered with gold, 175. 
Turanian origin of the Scythians, 60. 
Turgai, 122* 

Turkestan, 4, 15, 22, 28, 29, 32, 57, 115, 

197 ; Chinese, 115. 
Turkish nomads, 14. 
Turks, 9. 

Turquoise, 19, 135. 
Tuscany, 231. 
Tyche, representation, 105, 
Tyras, 63, 155, 162, 216, 217, 22t. 

Ufa, 1 22 
Ukraine, 224, 238* 


2 59 

Olskt, tumulus, 22, 31, 41, 47, 199, 226. 

V lyases, 62. 

Oman, 224. 

Untcrsiebenbrunnen, 131 ; e, Sieben- 

Ur dynasty, 29. 
Ural, Cossacks district, 122 ; mountains, 

18, 32, 122 ; river, 122 ; steppes, 13, 85, 

Iljf, 122, 143, 144, 
Urn, fields, 5, 146 ; funerary, 17. 
llspe, 164. 
Ust-Labinskaya, find, 128, 140, 177, 233. 

Vat dl Nievole, find, 231, 

Valens, 1 88. 

Valentintan, 184, 188, 2T7. 

Valerius Flaceus, ijf, 113. 

Valmeray, find, 187. 

Van, 35, 58, 228. 

Vandal period, 187 ; polychrome style, 191. 

Vandals, 119, 236. 

Vannic kingdom, 38, 226 ; pre- Vannic 
antiquities, 225. 

Varangcrs, 210, 213, 214. 

Varus, 153. 

Vases, clay, Ionian, 3, 63, 74 ; black- 
figured, *,«,«; red-figured, 3, 53, 78, 
229 ; 01 trie K*'fch sdyle, 37 ; in the* of a sphinx, painted, 79 ; Pana- 
thenaic, 3, 54 ; with signatures of artists, 
Attic, 74, 76 ; painted with reliefs, 175 ; 
painted, modelled, and gilded, 76 ; in 
the form of animals and human heads, 
128, 233 ; Chinese, Han dynasty, 205, 
206; glass, 127, 128, 132, 133, 182,233, 
imitating metal, 232, 233, encased in 
gold, 133, 142 ; metal, bronze, 125, 130, 
145, Chinese, 199, 200, Ionian, 108 ; 
copper, 20, 30, 31, 48 ; eleetrum, 97, 
1081 gold, 3, 19, 30, 31, 50, 130, 134, 
135, 140, 142, 188; silver, 3, 9, io, 
19-28, 30, 31, 53, 97, io2 T 108, 109, 1 ti, 
130, 175, 231, 232, 236 ; openwork, 142 ; 
stone, 19; wooden, 188, plated with 
gold, 102 ; sacred, 48, 88, 105, 106, 108, 
128 i mountings, 174, 232, 233 ; v. 

Vasyurinskaya Gora, tumulus, 4, 76, 81, 

Vaults in graves, 75, 78, 83 ; barrel, 75, 78, 
79, 170," 175 ; corbelled or Egyptian, 75, 
76. 78, 79, 81 ; round semicircular, 77 ; 
hepped, 175 

Vegetable decoration, 16, in, 188, 193;' 

v. Floral, 
Verkhneudinsk, find, 203. 
Vcseldvski, N., 4. 5, 19, 54, 126, 140, 231 
Vespasian, 117. 
Vessels, t>. Vases. 
Vettcrsfelde, find, 42, 49, 52, 173, 193, 

Viking funerary ship, 207. 
Villages fortified, painted, 25, 
Visigoths, 218. 
Vistula, river, 219. 
Vladimir, prince, 221. 
Vodyanoe, find, 233. 
Volga, river, 14, 85, 1 15, 124, 125, 144, 210, 

213, arc, 219-21. 
V6lkov, 1 h., 5, 16. 
Voronezh, 86, 96, 97, 108, 109, in. 
Vorftnezhskaya Stanitsa, tumulus, 41, 226. 
V6rskla, river, 96. 
Vozdvizhenskaya Stanitsa, tumulus, 127, 

131, 136, 139,232,233. 

Wagons, funerary, 207 ; models, e>. Models. 

Water, engraved, 24, 25, 

Watzinger, C, 172. 

Weapons, liosphoran, 169, 171 ; Cim- 
merian. 40, 41 ; Copper Af»e, 19, 29, 30, 
polished stone, 20 ; Greek, 74 ; Greco- 
Scythian, 76 ; Iron Age, 61 Hallstatt 
type, 90, 92-4, 97, La T£ne, 145 ; Sar- 

iiialian, 121, 123~5» *3*r r 43> «&9* z 3 l I 

Scythian, 47, 51, »fi, 102, 108, no, 121, 

227 ; v. Arms, 
Weight in the form of an ass, 58. 
Wends, 219. 
Whetstone, 46, 175. 
White Alans, v. Roxalans. 
White Island of Achilles, 36. 
White Sea, 210, 

Wilamowhz-Moellendorf, U. von, 62. 
Witsen, N., 140, 141, 232. 
Wolves, 54 ; representations, 195 ; heads, 

Women buried with the master, 45, 47, 48. 

Writing system, Sarmatian, 234 ; v. Alpha- 
betical signs. 

Xenophantos, 76. 
Xenophon, 63. 
Xerxes, 9. 



Yanchekr&k, find, 136, 137, 139. 
Yaros&vskaya Stanltsa, tumulus, 127, 232. 
Yenissei, river, 231, 234. 
Yuz-Ob&, tumulus. 75, 77, 79. 

ZabElin, U 4* 5> *3 8 - 
Zahn, it, 176. 
Zakim, find, 53. 
Zela, 150, 235. 

Zeus, 107. 

Zcuas, K., 60. 

Zn&menka, tumulus, 95. 

Zopyrion, 86, 90. 

Zoroastrian, pre-, world, 11. 

Zorsines, king, 164. 

Zubov'a farm (Zubovski), tumulus, 127, 

128, 131, 189, 232-4. 
Zuevskoe, find, 200, 
Zv&na, o. Tsvctna. 





Bo.-tRn of rniTCRS 





OCTOBER 1920 TO JULY 19-1 



■■tress O* 
»HE hCW £K» printing COMMNt 

u*m.*»!£R, PA, 



Those historians, both Russian and foreign, who endeavored to 
trace the outlines of the history of Russia, used to begin with the 
formation of a Scandinavian -Slavonic state at K.iev on the Dnieper 
in the ninth century A. D. This starting-point was determined by 
our historical tradition. The first Slavonic annals, compiled by 
monks of the Kiev monasteries, began to chronicle at this epoch the 
transactions of what was destined to become Russia, and modern 
historians were only too willing to follow the same path 1 

But by this method many vital questions of earh Russian history 
remained unanswered and obscure. How could such an entirely 
uncivilized nation, as the Slavonic tribes were agreed to be, have had 
power to convert in a very short time the foreign conquerors — the 
Scandinavian ruling class — into pure Slavs in speech and customs? 
How could the state of Kiev develop such a brilliant civilization as 
that which has been made e\ r ideiit by recent excavations there? 3 
How is one to explain the relations between the late Roman, that is, 
the Byzantine state and this, new Slavonic kingdom un the Dnieper? 
How are we to understand the possibility of such a speedy develop- 
ment of the Christian faith in this new state? What were the rea- 
sons for the spread of the Kiev civilization throughout the different 
Slavonic and Finnish tribes in southern and central Russia ? 

It is clear that Our Slavonic annals could not give an answer to 
these questions, though they are of the first importance- On the 
other side the Byzantine historians paid almost no attention to their 
northern neighbors and foes and were satisfied to record the various 
conflicts between the different northern tribes and the armed forces 
of Byzantium. The late Romans of this dark period had many 

1 Sec the last src-ncral irenrrnents of Russian history. V. O. Kluchcvski. A 
History of Russia (traxiS. by C* J- Hogarth), vol- I. (London and New York, 
1911); S. Platonov. Lectvnpf cut Russia?t History t la&t t-diuon, V: troKrad. 11/17". 
in Russian >. 

s Count T. Tolstoi and N. Kondakov, Russian Antiquities, vol. V. (St. Peters- 
burg, 1S97) ; N, Kondakov, The Russian Treasures (St. Petersburg, i8^6> ; J. 
Grabar. History of Russian Art rol I. Architecture (Moscow igog), Reports 
of I he new excavations in Ki»:v carried out by D. Mileev are printed in the 
Reports of the Archaeological Commission for 1908—1915; cf. Bulletin de la 
Comm. Arch, for the same years. 

' J?o 3 I 

204 Mikhail Rostoi'tsczr 

misfortunes to record, and the various important processes which 
developed behind the curtain of different Germanic. Iranian, and 
Mongolian tribes, who carried with them other tribes and peoples, 
remained unknown and uninteresting to them. 

It is evident that the answer to the questions which I have 
sketched above exempli causa can lie given only by investigating the 
successive stages of cultural development in South Russia at the 
time of the great migrations, at the time of the Roman Empire, and 
backward to the times of the first relations between South Russia 
and the classical peoples of the East and West. For this period our 
written documents are scanty and one-sided. The only full and 
impartial evidence is that which has resulted from the archaeological 
investigations in South Russia. But although the archaeological 
material gathered by generations of investigators is very abundant 
and very important, the scientific exploration of it has lagged far 
behind the accumulation of these unwritten documents. 

Classical scholars endeavored to explain the scanty mentions ol 
South Russia in the classical historical tradition (chiefly in Hero- 
dotus >. and classical archaeologists dealt with the products of class- 
ical art found in the remains of towns and the cemeteries of Greek 
cities on the shores of the Black Sea, merely with the desire to eluci- 
date the evolution of Greek life, art, and religion in these remote 
corners of the Greek world. The remains which were found in the 
graves of the native population of South Russia were studied mostly 
by students of prehistoric times, and no links, except Herodottis's 
description of the burial customs of the Scythians, were discovered 
between the native population and the Greek cities. Orientalists 
paid but little attention to the various Oriental tribes, who formed 
the main population of South Russia for centuries, because there 
were such scanty remains of their language. It is a recognized fact 
that most Orientalists were and still are pure philologists. 

Thus no successful attempt was made to combine all these dif- 
ferent sources and to trace a history of South Russia as a whole. 
And I must emphasize the statement that only an attempt of this 
comprehensive kind could, if not elucidate (which requires many 
special studies and a vast knowledge of comparative materials), at 
least endeavor to bring the different questions to a possibility of 
solution, by pointing out the tasks which are the most im|K>rtanl 
and clearing the path which is to be followed. 

The ground for undertaking such an investigation has been well 
prepared by generations of scholars. The classical evidence has 
been collected, as regards both the literary sources and the inscrip- 

South Russia in Early *lgcs 205 

tions. by B. Latyshev, who also prepared from the \vriters of the 
Byzantine epoch a full collection of quotations dealing with South 
Russia. The history of the Greek colonies on the chores of the 
Black Sea has l>een made clear by many scholars, both Russian and 
foreign. Numismatic evidence has been and is being carefully reg- 
istered and classified by eminent numismatists such as Berliner de 
Lagarde, Oreshnikov, and others. The Bolshevist revolution, stop- 
ping the whole civilized life of the country, prevented the publica- 
tion of a corpus of Greek coins of the Black Sea colonies by Re- 
tovski and myself 

Enormous progress has been made in the archaeological inves- 
tigation of South Kussia- First French, and afterwards Russian, 
scholars began a systematic archaeological exploration of the sites 
of the Greek cities on the Black Sea, an exploration both of the 
remains of the towns and of the cemeteries, and it went on without 
interruption till the beginning of the Bolshevist revolution. Splen- 
did work has been done for the Dorian colony Chersonesos (near 
Sevastopol 1, for the Ionian colony Olbta, at the mouth of the Rug 
and Dnieper, and for the vast cemeteries of the centre of the Bos- 
poran state, Panticapaeum (tile modem Kertch). 

Still more important perhaps have l*cen the results of the exca- 
vations of the thousands and thousands of harrows found all over 
the steppes of South Russia, Interest in these excavations was 
awakened by the remarkable results achieved in the middle of the 
past century by Zabielin and Tiesenhaitsen on the lower Dnieper, 
and in the delta of the river Kuban, the so-called 1 amaii peuiiisula- 
They succeeded in discovering a set of graves which were, without 
doubt, those of native kings or princes, and which yielded an enor- 
mous harvest of golden and silver vases, jewelry of the finest kinds, 
richly adorned horse-trappings, etc. After this brilliant beginning 
discoveries followed one another almost without interruption. Tin 
most important of them were made b> the indefatigable energy and 
great skill of the late Professor X. \ esse lov ski. who \ ear after 
year opened barrow aEter barrow and filled the Museum of the Her- 
mitage in Tetrograd with many thousand of objects, all of the 
greatest scientific and artistic value. His fields of activity were the 
steppes oil the lower course of the Dnieper and the valley of the 
Kuban, At the same time the shores of the middle Dnieper and its 
eastern affluents were explored systematically bv manv Russian 
scholars, among whom the leaders were the president of the Arch- 
aeological Commission, Count A. Bohrin?.ki, and the keeper of the 
Archaeological Museum at Kiev. Y. Hvoika. I cannot deal more at 

2o6 J\Iikfiail Rost outset 1 

length with the history of the archaeological discoveries made during 
the last fifty years in South Russia. A full account may be found 
in the recent book of Ellis H. Minns, Scythians and Greeks. 3 I will 
only point out that all these discoveries were followed by careful 
reports and by many attempts to give a general account of the whole 
mass of archaeological evidence collected during half a century of 
systematic investigation. Books such as the famous Antiqnites da 
BQsphorc LimiiU'ricn, the well-known Russian Antiquities of Count 
Tolstoi and Kondakov, the three big volumes of Count Bobrinski 
on his excavations near Smela, and the volume of Minns cited above, 
are and will be for generations so many sources of trustworthy 

And 3 r et no real attempt has been made hitherto to trace the his- 
tory of the country as a whole and to combine this history with the 
historical evolution of the ancient world in general. The task in 
itself is a very difficult and complicated one. South Russia, from 
its geographical position, is a land of different influences, corning 
from the north, the east, the south, and the west, and fusing into 
one in the vast open steppes on the shores of the great Russian 
rivers. Through the Caucasus South Russia was in uninterrupted 
communication with the great Eastern monarchies. One of the 
monarchies — that around the lake of Van* — was almost the imme- 
diate neighbor of the tribes who occupied the valley of the Kuban. 
We are just beginning, thanks to the recent discoveries of Russian 
scholars, to understand how great was the importance of this mighty 
monarchy in eastern history during the last millennium B* C. and 
how intimate was its connection with South Russia and the Cau- 
casian tribes. Through the steppes on the shores of the Caspian 
Sea Russia was largely open to the influences and migrations, first 
of Iranian and then of Mongolian tribes. The great Russian rivers 
formed an unbroken link between the steppes of South Russia on 
one side, and the Ural mountains, and also the forests, swamps, and 

a (Cambridge. 191 3; see Amer. Hist. Rev.. XIX. 843— 848. > He gives also a 
detailed bibliography of Russian and foreign works published °*> I he subject 
during the last century. Cf. my two articles. " L'ExpI oration Archeologique de 
la Kussic Meridionale de 1912 a 1917 ", in the Journal des Sax'attts. n. s.« NVIII. 
49—61. 109— 1.22 (March— April. May— June, xo^o). 

* On the history of the Vannic kingdom. Hall, The Ancient History of the 
Near East (1913), p. 516; B. Turaicv, History of the Ancient Orient, II. (1012). 
jC (in Russian). Excavations during the war brought to light new and very 
important inscriptions indicating relations between Van and J a van (N. Marr. 
Bull, de I'AeoA. des Sciences <fc Peircgrad, 1Q18) and artistic monuments of great 
value; see Pharmakovsfci, Jlfarcrials for the Archaeology of Ru.tsia, XXXIV. 
< I9'4l. 45 IT. 

South Russia in Early Ages 207 

lakes of Central and Xorthem Russia, on the oilier. Tn the west, 
no natural obstacles hindered a free intercourse between South 
Russia and the valley of the Danube, as well as Central Europe in 
general, and in the south the vast and navigable Black Sea attracted 
the keen daring sailors of the Mediterranean from time immemorial. 

And yet we have no right to affirm that South Russia was a land 
of continuous migrations, an open corridor for newcomers from 
the east and the west. The steppes of South Russia are so rich 
both as pastures and as arable land, the rivers are so rich in fish, and 
the forests on the northern edge of the steppes so full of game, that 
every newcomer to South Russia did his best to stay as long as pos- 
sible in this Eldorado both for nomads and for settled dwellers. 

Therefore the history of South Russia is very complicated and 
the aspects of its cultural life are very varied. But the task of the 
investigator is at least not hopeless, for most of the peoples who 
settled in South Ru>.-in stayed for long centuries and left behind 
them various traces of their life. 

I will now endeavor to give a short account of the different stages 
of the political, social, and artistic development of South Russia 
during the prehistoric and so-called classical period, 1. c. till the 
epoch of the great migrations. My aim, in this short article, is not 
to depict historical life as it developed on the shores of the Black 
Sea. but to point out, in the light of evidence furnished by the 
archaeological excavations, classical authors, and epigraph ical and 
numismatic monument?., the most important problems which arise 
from the study of these documents. An attempt to answer these 
questions more fully, from the point of view of universal history, 
will be shortly given by me in my forthcoming book The Iranians 
and the Greeks in South Russia (Oxford, Clarendon Press). 

The first problem of general significance is presented to the his- 
torian by the recent discoveries, in the valley of the middle Dnieper 
and of the lower Bug. of very important remains of neolithic and 
eneolithic (first copper period) villages and burial-places with pecu- 
liar and artistic painted ceramics. The painted pottery and the 
clay statuettes (human being*, animals, models of houses, and sacred 
vessels), found mostly in ruined buildings of a peculiar nature — half 
burial-place-*, half funerary shrines — which were surrounded by 
reed and clay walls and covered by a roof, belongs to a large class 
of similar pottery called by the students of prehistoric life " the 
pottery of spirals and meander". This pottery is found over a 

B Tbe last treatise on the problem, Homes, Urgescltichle der £ifdcnden Kittist 
in Buropa (second ed.. 1915). I>P* 284 fit', and 604 ft'. 

AM. HIST. REV., VOL. XXVI. 1 .; . 

2o8 Mikhail Rostoz'tscz* 

large area in the southern part of Central Europe- Similar painted 
vases, hut different in both technique and ornaments, have been 
found in Thessaly and in Crete. Asia Minor is also full of remains 
of similar pottery which seem to be connected with the artistic 
painted pottery of Elam. Babylonia, and Turkestan of the same 
epoch rather than with the European pottery of the " spirals and 
meander *\ It is worthy of note that the Elamitic and Mesopota- 
mian remains are in close connection with sherds of similar vases 
found by Sir Aurel Stein in heaps all over Scistan and Baluchistan. 
The question of the relations between the European pottery and that 
of Asia is hotly debated, no agreement having been reached on the 
problem, Polygenists {e.g., Pettier*) affirm a simultaneous appear- 
ance of similar phenomena in different places, monogenists {e, g., 
Wilke 1 } speak of migrations or commercial intercourse. South 
Russian discoveries have complicated the question instead of clear- 
ing it up. The South-Russian, Gahcian, and Rumanian group of 
this pottery appears to be the most richly developed European group, 
more similar to the Asiatic than to either of the other European 
series. The problem of this island of Asiatic pottery in Europe still 
awaits its solution and is made the more difficult by the fact that no 
pottery of this kind has been found either in the eastern part of 
South Russia or in the Caucasus. It is necessary to conjecture the 
existence of some links with Central Asia through Asia Minor, The 
resemblance between Flam and South Russia is too close to be 

An important fact which may 1>e deduced from the existence of 
this early centre of advanced civilization in South Russia is that 
already at this epoch the valley of the middle Dnieper was a land 
of settled dwellers, in no case nomads, who had reached a high 
standard of civilized life. 

Still more important is the observation that the middle- Dnieper 
centre of civilization was gradually absorbed by a much lower civi- 
lization of nomadic type which is characterized by burials in the 
form of barrows. These barrows cover graves of different forms, 
with red-colored skeletons in the contracted position. I hit before 
being absorbed the middle-Dnieper civilization strongly influenced 
the nomads, brought them partly to settled life, and created for I hem 
a peculiar pottery with incised and painted decoration, highly devel- 
oped. We observe this phenomenon chiefly in the steppes between 

*f AfcmorFCS tir in Di-li-galion en Pcrsc, Xlll. ( n m 

• "■ Spiral niaander Keramik und Gcfiissiualcrci ", in AfaixiwsUihlioihek, vol. 
Ill (1910J. 

South Russia in Early .Igcs 209 

the Dnieper and the Don, but it may have had a much wider devel- 

This fusion of the two types of civilization cited above had 
already taken place at the time when metals began to be in common 
use* first copper, afterwards bronze. The first knowledge of metals 
came to the steppes on the northern shores of the Clark Sea not 
from the west, but from the east. ft was in the valley of the river 
Kuban that a metallic civilization of a high standard was first devel- 
oped in South Russia, at the same epoch when a similar civilization 
was brought about in Mesopotamia and Egypt. Many finds in large 
barrows on the river Kuban, especially one in a grave excavated by 
Vesselovsfci in Maikop, have furnished us with many artistic golden 
and silver objects made with the greatest >kill and a highly devel- 
oped technique, in no way inferior to those which were found in 
Babylonia and Egypt belonging to the same age. I have devoted 
to these finds a special article* The main questions which we have 
to decide after having studied the monuments I have mentioned are: 
are they contemporary with the finds in Egypt and Babylonia, and 
if so how are we to explain their similarity to those of these regions, 
and also their points of difference? My own opinion is that the 
two series are contemporary, that no intercourse can be proved, and 
that therefore we have to suppose an independent beginning of civi- 
lized life in a place whose geographical conditions are not unlike 
those of Babylonia and Egypt, 

The exploration of South Russia and especially of the Kuban 
valley has not been systematic enough to make it certain that the 
lack of finds belonging to the pure bronze period is not accidental, 
whereas the central and southern Caucasus 011 the one hand and the 
Hungarian plain on the other are full of remains of this period, a 
fact which would lead us to expect some finds of the same date in 
the northern Caucasus and also on the Dnieper. It mu>t be taken 
into consideration that the bronze age in the Caucasus shows very 
similar features to those which characterize the copper age in the 
Kuban valley. 

But as matters are, we have no traces of a highly developed 
bronze age in South Russia. From the copper age we come almost 
directly to the early iron age. 1. r. r to the first millennium B. C. Of 
that epoch two facts of primary importance must be recorded: the 
appearance both in the southern Caucasus and in South Russia in 
general of two waves of invaders — first of Cimmerians, ami after- 

* M. Rosicvtse\. "'L'Agre de Crvvre dans 1e Caucase Septentrional et les Civi- 
lisations dc Soumcr ct dc l'tyypte Protodynastiqtn- ". jn Rc-uc .-ircheologiquc. 
XII. 1—37 <Jnly-< Dctoturr. 1920). 

2 1 o 71/ ikh a U K ost ot 't sev 

wards of Scythians. The question, who were and whence came the 
Cimmerians, is a crucial one, Cimmerians are a people well known 
both to the Oriental and to the Greek historical tradition. The 
former records their prolonged fight against the Vannic kingdom 
first and the Assyrian kings afterwards, beginning at the end of the 
eighth century B. C, and their triumphal march through Asia Minor, 
which brought them into collision with Lydia and the earliest Greek 
towns in Asia Minor, The second knows of their conquest of the 
Greek towns in Asia Minor on the one hand, and, on the other, of 
their long stay on the shores of the Black Sea, iti the Crimea and 
the Taman peninsula. The Bosporus was, according to this tradi- 
tion, the starting-point of the Cimmerians for their invasion of Asia 
Minor. Both are fully acquainted with their rivalry with the 
Scythians and with the final victory of the latter both in South 
Russia and in Asia Minor, The facts are well known and I need 
not insist on them.* 

Now we may ask : who were the Cimmerians, how long did they 
stay on the shores of the Black Sea, what was the influence which 
they exerted on South Russia, and have we any remains of their 
sojourn on the Black Sea? I cannot deal with all these questions 
at length, but I must mention a few facts of primary moment. The 
best-informed and earliest Greek traditions unanimously affirm that 
the Cimmerians were of Thracian origin. Modern historians partly 
prefer to urge the occurrence of some Iranian names among the 
Cimmerian rulers and to make them near relatives of the Scythians, 
their bitterest enemies, T may notice a third hypothesis, that of 
Posidonius. False and imaginary etymologies and the desire to 
explain some verses of Homer caused him to identify the Cim- 
merians with the Cimbri and to advocate their northern origin. Rut 
nobody took into consideration, first of all, that the historical tradi- 
tion of the future kingdom of the Bosporus implied a prolonged slay 
of the Cimmerians on the shores of the Black Sea, pointing out that 
many places on the straits of Kertch preserved the name of the Cim- 
merians, especially the straits themselves which were called Cim- 
merian Bosporus. Secondly, nobody has explained the fact that the 
population of the future kingdom of Bosporus, and in particular the 
ruling classes, bore partly Thracian names, and that the first rulers 
of Panticapaeum — a Milesian colony — were all Thracians. The 

9 The best summary of Our Oriental evidence is given by M. St reck. Assur- 
banipnl. etc. (Leipzig; 1916, I'ortlcrasiatische Bibliothch}. p. ccclxxi ; cf. Olmstead 
in Cornell Studies in Hist, and Pol., II., and in Anier. Hist. Assoc. Ann, Ref.. 
ionr; (Washington, 1911} ; and E. Mtyer. Geschichte des Alterfums, I 1 , §§ 45.2 fif. 

T. 2*. % 5 JO. 

South Russia in Early Ag€S 2 1 1 

usual suggestion, that these rulers were Thracian soldiers invited 
by the Greek population to defend them against the Scythians, is 
historically impossible and explains nothing. In the third place I 
would insist on the evidence of some early remains hi the future 
kingdom of Eosporus which are similar to those in Hungary and in 
Asia Minor, especially at Troy. All these facts seem to corroborate 
the earliest Greek traditions and to establish the probability that the 
Cimmerians were of Thracian origin. This fact does not involve 
their having come from the Balkan Peninsula. We do not know how 
old is the Thracian population in the Balkans, and vvc may doubt 
that it was autochthonous. The solution of this problem may be 
found when we are better acquainted with the Thracian language* 
which is practically unknown, and with the early ethnography of 
Central Asia. As far as our present knowledge goes, we cannot 
eliminate the hypothesis that many tribes of Central Asia may claim 
a close affinity with the Thracian $. in the first place the Massagetae. 
Less probable is the supposition that the Thracian s came from Cen- 
tral and Northern Russia or through those countries from the shores 
of the Baltic and the Xorth Sea. 

However, the Cimmerians were obliged to yield their place in 
South Russia to Iranian new-comers, the Scythians, who probably 
dragged with them some Mongolian tribes. Though the Scythians 
were always treated by the historians of the ancient world as a kind 
of negligible quantity, as a barbarous nomadic tribe which belongs 
entirely to the domain of prehistoric studies, the results of the exca- 
vations in South Russia show the Scythians to have been a factor 
of some importance in the political development of the ancient world 
and to have had a comparatively wide influence on the growth of 
civilized life in Eastern Europe in general. 

Let us bring some facts to support my statement. The Scythians 
formed in South Russia a stable and strong state which lasted for 
almost four centuries, from the seventh to the third century B. C. 
The existence of this established state Was the chief cause of the 
splendid development of the Greek colonies on the shores of the 
Black Sea, who rivalled in wealth and their high standard of mate- 
rial civilization the Greek cities of Asia Elinor — vassals of the Per- 
sian kingdom. 

Although organized as a nomadic and military .;tate, the Scyth- 
ians were in no way hostile to the settled life of tribes conquered bv 
them and to the material development of the Greek cities, their 
tributaries. The former supplied them with corn, fish, metals, and 
furs, the latter purchased Hie-e goods from the Scythians, paid for 

212 Mikhail Rostovtscv 

them in manufactured products partly imported from their mother- 
country, partly made by themselves, and thus gave Greece an oppor- 
tunity of providing herself with food-stuffs for her population and 
raw materials for her industry. We must not forget that for cen- 
turies South Russia fed a large part of the tireek countries,, and that 
Athens was ahle to develop her high standard of civilized life be- 
cause of regular importations of food-stuffs and raw materials from 
South Russia which allowed her to devote her energy to arts, sci- 
ences, and industry, and to build up her power. 

On the other hand, under the influence of Greece, Scythia raised 
her own civilization to a. comparatively high level. Having brought 
with them their peculiar tastes and habits, their original style in 
decorative art — the so-called animal style — the Scythians did not 
drop their peculiarities under Greek Influence. 10 They not only 
made the Greeks work for them, adapting themselves to Scythian 
requirements and thus developing new abilities, but learned from 
the Greeks their skill and employed this fresh knowledge to build 
up their own art on new lines. Through Sevthia civilized habits 
penetrated into Central Russia and acted as a stimulus to creative 
independent work among the South and Central Russian peoples. 
We dp not know whether there were Slavs already among them. 
Dm even if the Slavs came to Russia comparatively late, they cer- 
tainly absorbed the cultivation of their predecessors. 11 It is a mat- 
ter of further study to follow closely this process of the spread of 
the Greek and Graeco-Orieutal civilization through the medium of 
Scythians in Russia and in the Balkans, cradles of the future Sla- 
vonic states, 1 ' but even now the results of archaeological excavations 
show us how widely the Scythian influence extended and how flour- 
ishing was life on the hanks nf all the Ru>sian rivers during the 
centuries of Scythian domination. 13 In itself the Scythian state 

10 On the Scythian animal style see the recent work of C- Schuchhardt, 
Alteuropa in seiner Kultttr untt Stitentzeicttlunff (Strassburg and Berlin. 1919). 

*i Sc-e on these questions the valuable scries of works published by the Fin- 
nish scholar A. M. Tallgren. enumerated in his last two Volumes: Collection To%-&s- 
ttttc fHclsing>fors. 10*7). and L'Age tfe Bronze en Russie : la Civilisation d'Aniin- 
fhw (Hclsingfors, 19 '**")■ 

12 Recent excavations in Bulgaria have brought 10 light some graves of the 
fourth century B. C. with objects imitated from Scythian originals; see B. Filew. 
RUniische Mitlhcilnngcn, XXXII. (1917)-"* ff.-S G- Kaaarow, Bcilrage BWr Kulturge- 
srhicfitc der T broker ( Sarajevo. 1016). 

'3 Large towns with large cemet cries are found all over the region of the 
middle r>niei>er and its eastern tributaries; see the above tjuoted work nf Count 
A. Bobrinstki, and Drei'tiosli Pridncproria (I. ex Aittujuiu's de la RfffiOM d» 
Dnieper) by B. and V Khanenko. On 'he lower Dnieper scores of small town* 
sind villages, half Scy ihian. half Greek, developed along ihc river. See Gosrki-- 

South Russia in Early Ag€s 213 

presents many interesting features, \Yc ill ready know that the 
Scythians were Iranians. Iranians in genera? are hut little known 
to us. And yet how far-reaching has been their influence on the 
classical world ! What an opening for study, along with the greatest 
Iranian power — Persia, another Iranian state of entirely different 
mould, a state strong enough to challenge the Persian world - 
domination and to induce Darin-, to undertake a dangerous expedi- 
tion into the steppes of South Russia! This opportumtv of study is 
given to us by the ever increasing archaeological material, through 
which we can form an idea of the religious, social, economic, and 
political life of the Scythians. Finally, the Scythian state was a 
model on which later Asiatic states in South Russia were organized, 
and a thorough knowledge of it enables lis better to underhand the 
later nomadic states — dangerous rivals and foes of Slavonic Russia 
who again succeeded at the epoch of Tartar invasion in ruling an 
important part of the Russian land. 

T have already pointed out that the existence of a stable Scythian 
kingdom in South Russia gave the Greek settlers the opportunity 
of founding many important centres of civilized life on the northern 
shore of the Black Sea. The nio^t interesting of these is the llos- 
poran state on the straits of Kertch — a waterway uniting the Black 
and the Azov seas. The growth of thi> state is a phenomenon which 
calls for serious attention. 1 * 

From time immemorial traces of civilized life have been found 
on both shores of the straits. Different highways of international 
trade converged here and this convergence caused the inhabitants 
to take an active part in the exchange of goods coming to their doors 
from the north, east, and south. Gold. copj>er. iron. furs, slaves, 
fish, and leather were carried by caravans across the steppes of West 
Siberia and South Russia, by small boats on the Don and the Sea 
of Azov, and by ships on the Black Sea to this natural meeting- 
place — the Bosporan straits. No wonder that here was the centre 
of the Cimmerian kingdom and that after the fall of that kingdom 
the Scythians struggled hard for possession of it. nor that they en- 
countered a strong resistance in the native population, a resistance 
reinforced by Greek colonists attracted by the great opportunities 
of the district. No wonder, again, that the old inhabitants wel- 
comed the coming of Greek settlers who helped them to defend 
their independence against Scythian attacks. In this way were 

vicz. Bull, de !a Comtn. Arch, dc Rnssic. XLVII 117. and M Ebert. Praiustvr- 
tSChe Ze if sell rift . V. ( 1 Q 1 3 1 . 

•*Srr the valuable study of E- vtin Stern in Hermes, L». (1515)- 

2 14 Mikhail Rostoi'tscv 

founded the scores of Greek colonies which soon covered both shores 
of the straits. The most important were Panticapaeum on the 
Crimean shore and Phanagoria on the Caucasian. Common interest 
soon united these two groups with each other and with the native 
tribes. The scattered Greek towns and the indigenous population 
little by little sought and found a modus tnvendi which allowed them 
to form a strong community, able to uphold its independence. Thus 
arose the Bosporan state, a compromise between the tribal monarch- 
ical organization of the aborigines and the Greek self-governing- 

It is a matter of great interest to trace the development of the 
new community. A loosely knit confederation of cities and tribes 
in its beginnings, it became gradually a political body of dual nature. 
T he ruler of this body was for the Greeks an elected magistrate, for 
the natives a king ruling by divine right. Notwithstanding this 
apparent dualism, however, the constitution of the new state became 
gradually a purely monarchical one. The Greeks in the mother- 
country were fully aware of the fact and called the Bosporan 
archons and kings — tyrants. It was hard for the Greek colonists to 
give their support to these tyrants, especially as the tyrants were not 
Greeks but Hellenized natives. But the constant threat of Scythian 
supremacy overcame their repulsion to monarchical rule, and thus 
tyranny, which in Greek surroundings never lasted longer than one 
or two generations, stood firm in Bosporus for hundreds of years. 
This tyranny entered into diplomatic and commercial relations with 
the Greek world and was treated by the Greek states as a desirable 
friend. We must not forget that the tyrants of Bosporus disposed 
of all the corn produced in the country watered by the rivers Kuban 
and Don and in the Crimea and also of all the fish of these rivers 
and of the Sea of Azov, tlte Scythians having no commercial fleet 
and no ports of their own. Thus the kingdom of Bosporus became 
rich and mighty, with a peculiar social and economic organization 
akin to that of different Hellenistic states which gradually arose out 
of the monarchy of Alexander in the Orient. 

The growth of the Bosporan kingdom out of a combination of 
two different types of state-life — the tribal monarchy and the Greek 
free city — led to a peculiar dualism not only in the state: both its 
social and economic organization and its material civilization were 
also deeply affected* Rulers who were also extensive landowners, 
surrounded by a ruling aristocracy of feudal type and a city- 
population of retail traders, ship-owners, and craftsmen, present a 
social picture of great historical interest. Although pure Greek by 

South Russia in Marly slgcx 215 

origin, the inhabitants of the Greek cities in the Bosporan kingdom, 
governed as they were by a half-native dynasty, could not long re- 
main purely Greek in life, habits, and religion. 15 Everywhere, in all 
branches of civilized life, they were strongly influenced by their 
surroundings, especially as regards art and industry. Working for 
tribes of non-Greek race, the Greek settlers naturally adapted them- 
selves to the tastes of their clients, and thus built up gradually a 
new style both in architecture, and in decorative art. Take, for in- 
stance, the monumental graves of the Bosporan aristocracy, with 
their mighty step-vaults, which remind one of the famous grave of 
the Atreidae. Look at the beautiful gold coins with their masterly 
heads of the local rural divinities transformed intoSilcni and Satyrs, 
and again at the remains of their painted tombs and at the peculiar 
jewels and vases which they made to satisfy the requirements Ot 
their neighbors. Everywhere 3011 will find new feature.-, which 
cannot be explained by purely Greek analogies. But still all these 
products remain Greek both in workmanship and in style. 

Students oE art ought surely to pav more attention to this branch 
of Greek art than they have hitherto done. They will learn by this 
study how infinitely varied Greek art could be and how read\ were 
the Greek artists to grapple with new tasks and to comply with new 
requirements. They eagerly studied Scythian and Maeotian life, 
the dresses, the arms, the social and religious habits of these tribes, 
the forms of their sacred vessels, etc.. and used this f re^-h knowledge 
to create splendid works of Greek art. They ennobled primitive 
forms of vases, arms, and horse-equipment, and adorned them with 
lively scenes of a slightly idealized life of the Scythian and Maeo- 
tian tribes, in the spirit of the Stoic school and Ephorus. The 
ground for the best achievements of Hellenistic and Roman art in 
artistic ethnography was first prepared by Bosporan artists and 
craftsmen working for Iranians, whom they had themselves edu- 
cated in the appreciation of Greek art and thus enabled to under- 
stand the best creations of Greek genius. 

A new factor come into the life of South "Russia through the 
appearance in the steppes of fresh tribes of conquering invaders — 
the Sarmatians." 1 * They moved slowly from the east, crossed the 

lS See my paper. *' The Idea of the Kingly Power in Scythia arid in the 
Bosporus™, ir Bull, dc la Comttt. Arch.. NL1X. ; cf. Revue des Etirdrs Grccqucs, 
192 i. 

1* No pood general work on the- Sarmatians exists. See E. Taubler. Ktio, IX. 
O90Q). 14 : J. KuJakovski, The Alans according to the Testimonies of Classical 
and By^a*iri>i& Writers (Kiev. iSqoJ ; M. Rostovtsev, Ancient Decorative Painting 
in South Russia {St. Petersburg. iqjj), pp. 326 ft. and 340 ft. 

2i6 Mikhail Rosfoz'tscv 

rivers Ural and Volga, and already in the fourth century B. C. were 
approaching the Don. The Scythians were forced to yield before 
them, to evacuate the region on the Kuban, and to fall back on the 
right bank of the Don. At the same |>eriod political conditions in 
the west enabled the Scythians to resume their offensive against the 
Thracian tribes, checked at the end of the sixth century by Darius 
and afterwards by the buffer-state of the Odrysae — a creation, like 
the Bosporus, of Athens during the period of her greatest expansion. 
In this way arose the mighty western empire of the Scythians of the 
fourth and third centuries B. C, with a military and political centre 
on the Dnieper, instead of the former eastern centre which must be 
conjectured to have been situated on the western shore of the Sea 
of Azov. The Scythian power spread widely westwards and north- 
wards and firmly held the lauds along the middle Dnieper and its 
affluents and the whole tract of flat land between the Dneiper and 
the Danube, including the delta of the Danube— the Dobrudja. 

However, this last period in the history of the great Scvthian 
kingdom in South Russia was but ot short duration. The Sarma- 
ttans soon resumed their victorious advance and already by the 
middle of the third century B. C. a variety of new political factors 
put an end to the expansion of the Scythians westwards and north- 
wards. The most important of these new factors was the conquest 
of the Balkan Peninsula by the Celts. 1 ' Weak Scythian vassals in 
Thraeia. with no support from outside, could naturally by them- 
selves organize no effective resistance to the Celtic advance. On 
the other hand the Scythian kingdom, weakened by Sarmatiau at- 
tacks in the east and by a long struggle with the powerful Mace- 
donian kingdoms in the west — especially under the strong rule of 
Philip and Alexander— was obliged to leave its Thracian vassals to 
their own fate. Thus the Celtic advance from the north found 
hardly any resistance and was followed by chaos, not only in the 
Balkan Peninsula but also in South Russia. We must not forget 
that after the death of Lysmiachus the political balance of the Greek 
world shifted definitely from Macedonia to the eastern Hellenistic 
monarchies, and that Macedonia, the chief promoter of Hellenism 
in the Balkans, was in constant political convulsion and thus unable 
to fulfill its chief task — the defense of Greek civilization from north- 
ern invaders. 

Some inscriptions found in the Greek colony Olbia — the most 

"The last comprehensive work on the Celts in the Balkan Peninsula was 
published by G. Kazarow, ** The Celts in Thraeia and Macedonia ". in Transactions 
of the Bulgarian Academy, XVIII. (iqiq)- 

South Russia in Early Ages 217 

important harbor for the export of the produce of the valleys of the 
Dnieper and the Bug and therefore in constant relations with the 
Scythian kingdom — supply us with decisive evidence of the condi- 
tions in the western part of the Scythian kingdom in (he beginning 
of the third century 13. C. I refer especially to the long decree in 
honor of Protogenes. a rich merchant of Olbia and member of niie 
of the few families who preserved and increased their wealth during 
this troubled period. It appears, from this decree that the great 
king of Scythia. Saitapharnes. concentrated his forces on the 
Dnieper, that he lost his hold on his different vassal-kings between 
the Dnieper and the Bug, and that the whole swarm of these petty 
princes fled hastily eastwards and southwards before the coming 
Storm of Celtic and German invaders. 1 am convinced that such a 
state of things could only have been brought about by some serious 
blows inflicted by the Celts on the great Scythian kings somewhere 
between the Dneister and the Bug. 

The Celts of course did not remain in South Russia, The\" were 
attracted by the enormous wealth of Greece and .Asia Minor and 
concentrated their efforts on the task of penetrating into these dis- 
tricts. But the Scythian power could not recover after the heavy 
blows which it had suffered from the Celts, and was unable to hold 
its own against the different Illyrian. Thracian, and Germanic tribes 
who invaded South Russia. Moreover the conditions in the east 
became worse and worse. The Sarmatiiuis, as I have already men- 
tioned, crossed the Don earh in the third century ; in the second they 
reached the Dnieper and in the first the whole of Snith Russia was 
full of Sarmatian tribes moving westwards. 

The consequences of these events were exceeding important for 
the history of the ancient world. The Scythians retired to the 
Crimea and began to press hard on the Greek towns trying to find 
an outlet for their commerce. The kingdom of Bosporus and the 
Chersonesos were unable to defend themselves from the Scythian 
pressure. The Bosporus especially su tiered severely, both from the 
Sarmatian s who settled on the Don and the Kuban and occupied the 
peninsula of Tainan and from the Scythians in the Crimea. An- 
archy, which reigned in the steppes, almost entirely checked the 
profitable trade of the Greeks and exhausted the accumulated wealth 
of the Greek cities with contributions extorted by the Scythians and 
Sarmatians and with payments to hired soldiers. The wave of 
oriental invaders seemed to doom Hellenism in South Russia to a 
final fall. 

Nevertheless this fall did not come; it was delaved for some ceil- 

2i8 Mikhail Rostoz'tsev 

tunes. Instead, civilized life liegan to flourish anew in the Greek 
cities and once more advanced deeply into the steppes of South 
Russia. The reasons for this development were, on the one side, 
the character of the new conquerors of South Russia — the Sarma- 
tians, and on the other the political development of the Orient in 
general which brought South Russia under the sway of the nascent 
and developing Roman Empire. Let me deal first with the Sar- 

Like the Scythians, the Sarmatians were of Iranian descent. 
For centuries they remained prohably in Turkestan, where they 
were in close relations first with the Persians and afterwards with 
the different half-Greek states created in the East by Alexander. 
These links were not broken after the beginning of the westward 
movement of the Sarmatians. We have every reason to suppose 
that they remained in touch both with the Parthian kingdom and 
with Central Asia. From Turkestan the Sarmatians. who were by 
no means wild barbarians, brought a powerful military organization, 
excellent weapons, civilized habits, and a strong taste for artistic 
objects both of Persian and of Central- Asiatic manufacture, from 
which sprang germs of artistic development among the Sarmatians 

Thus the Sarmatians went to South Russia thoroughly prepared 
to take the place of the Scythians both in their political and in their 
commercial relations. They were nevertheless unable to succeed in 
creating in the steppes of South Russia a centralized state like that 
of the Scythians. They remained divided into different independent 
tribes, sometimes fighting one against another, but usually separated 
by intervening heterogeneous tribes. 

Though unable to regenerate the Scythian state, the Sarmatians 
inherited all the traditions of Scythian commercial and political in- 
tercourse, especially with the Greek cities. Like the Scythians in 
their best epoch they did not seriously contemplate the eventual con- 
quest of the Greek cities. They made no single attempt of this sort, 
though the occupation of Olbia and Tyras would have been in no 
way difficult. They preferred to enter into close commercial rela- 
tions with the Greek cities, to impose on them their tastes and habits, 
to make Greeks work for them and to pa}' for the Greek goods with 
the products of their agriculture and commerce. We must take into 
account that the Sarmatians, like the Scythians, did not break up the 
agricultural exploitation of some parts of South Russia by the native 
population, and endeavored to maintain commercial relations with 
Persia, Central Asia, India, and China. The results of this policy 

Satfli Russia in liarly ,-lgcs 219 

were: the possibility oif existence and development for the Greek 
cities, the gradual infiltration of Sarmatian elements into them, and 
the birth of a new artistic style out of the collaboration of Greek 
artists and Sarmatian employers. We will deal with the first two 
points later; let us say now a few words about the third. 

The Sarmatians brought with them from their native country 
two things which they required from the artists who worked for 
them. Besides asking for the weapons and jewels which they were 
accustomed to use, they insisted upon having these ornamented in a 
fashion always characteristic of the Iranian bast: I mean the orna- 
mentation by means of inset colored stones and enamels, and the 
use for this ornamentation chiefly of geometric designs and figures 
of animals. 18 These requirements were willingly accepted by the 
Greek artists and thus there arose in the Greek towns an entirely 
new artistic stvle in jewelry and toreutics, the so-called polychrome 
style, often combined with the animal style. The history of the 
gradual development of this style in South Russia is of first impor- 
tance for the history of art in medieval Europe. T cannot deal with 
this problem at length, but I must emphasize that T can prove that 
the so-called Merovingian or Gothic style in jewelry and toreutics 
developed gradually out of the elements brought by the Sarmatians 
and handed over first to the Greeks on the Black Sea and afterwards 
to the Goths who invaded South Rtissta from the north. All the 
successive steps of this development can he traced in South Russia, 
arid scores of monuments, sometimes of the greatest artistic value, 
enable us to study this development in all its phases. 1 will mention 
only some important finds, such as the recent finds near Orenburg 
(third to second century B. C). those of the Ktilian region and the 
Tama 11 peninsula (second century P«. C. to second or third century 
A. D. ). of the Don (especially the treasure of Novocherkassk, first 
century B. C. to first century- A. D.), of Western Siberia (rich gold 
jewels and horse-trappings- of the same epoch K of Rumania (the 
treasure of Petroasa), all of the more ancient period, and some of 
the later epoch, such as the finds of Kertch (beginning with the 
second century A. D.), of the South Russian steppes (first to third 
century A. D. ), of Rumania. Hungary, Austria, Germany, France, 
Britain, Spain. North Africa, which all form an uninterrupted chain 
whose rings are linked together by identical style, similar technique, 
and the shape of the objects. It is the same track which the Sar- 
matians themselves followed in their gradual advance towards the 

is A detailed treatment of the evolution of the polychrome style ivill he given 
in my forthcoming hook. The Iranians and the Greeks in S'otith Russia. 

2 20 Mikhail Rostot'tsev 

On the other hand, the Samiatian animal style, after having 
adopted many peculiarities from the Scythian animal style, percep- 
tibly influenced central and eastern Russia and. through their me- 
dium* northern Europe, thus originating both in Russia and in 
Scandinavia a peculiar animal st3'le which held its own in these 
countries for centuries and the influence of which can be traced in 
the Romanesque and so-called Gothic style in central and southern 

Though not hostile to Greek civilization, the Sarmatians were a 
great danger to the Greek colonies on the Black Sea, 18 Nobodv in 
these colonies knew that the Sarmalians had no intention of destroy- 
ing or conquering. On the other hand, as I have already pointed 
out, the Scythians under the pressure of the Sarmatians became 
more and more insolent and threatened the Greek cities with destruc- 
tion. The Greek colonies, unable to defend themselves, naturally 
looked in every direction for protection. But the second century 
B, O, when the Sarmatians expanded with exceptional energy and 
the Scythians succeeded in forming once more a strong state in the 
Crimea under the sceptre of Skilurus, was a troubled epoch in the 
history of the ancient world. Of mighty protectors there were none 
in the Hast, all the more or less Hellenized kings in the Orient being 
either vassals or clients of Rome, and Rome itself, involved as she 
was in an internal, ever-growing struggle, was in no way anxious to 
support the Pontic Greeks against their enemies. This is the ex- 
planation of the fact that the Pontic Greeks sought and found help 
from the most dangerous foe Rome had in the second century B. C-, 
King Mithridates of Pontus, a half- Iranian dynast of high ambition. 
Everyone knows the history of the struggle between Rome and 
Mithridates. Everyone remembers that Mithridates made his last 
stand in the Bosporan kingdom, and that lie was betrayed here first 
by the Pontic Greeks and afterwards ]*y his own son. 

The consequences of the temporary rule of Mithridates over the 
whole of the Crimea were momentous in the history of South Russia, 
Mithridates endeavored to organize the whole eastern Iranian world, 
including Scythians, Sarmatians. and Thracians, against Rome. 
After his death Rome was thus faced with the possibility of a re- 
newal of the Mithridatic attempt, and understood clearly that a con- 
sistent policy towards the Parthians could not be carried out without 

*J> On the history of South Russia in the Roman epoch, see E von Stern, in 
Hermes, L. <i9*S>j ^n, and my own papers. " Pont us. Bilhynia, Bosporus", in 
Annals t>f the British School tit Athens, XXTT. ; "" Caesar and the South of Rus- 
sia '*, in Journal of Roman Studies, 151?. pp. 27 ft". ; *' Queen Dynamis of Bos- 
porus " in Journal of Hellenic Studies. XXXIX. (iqj^> SB, 

South Russia in Early +4ges 221 

first settling conditions not onh on the southern shore of the Black 
Sea but also on the eastern and northern. The former indifference 
of the Romans towards the Black Sea was now transformed into a 
lively interest. Caesar, Augustus, and their followers all watched 
attentively over the Greek colonies on the Black Sea and did their 
best to consolidate their influence over them and to help them in the 
constant struggle against the Scythians and Sarniatians. Creek set- 
tlers on the Black Sea. threatened by the Iranian danger, were relia- 
ble vassals of the Romans, strong advanced posts of Creek civili- 
zation standing like islands, amidst the Iranian sea. and excellent 
spies who, in their own interest, kept the Romans informed of all 
the new events in the Iranian world. We must take into considera- 
tion that already in the first century A. I). Sarniatian vanguards had 
come into conflict with the Roman troops on the Danube. Hence 
the policy of Rome to transform the kingdom of Bosporus into a 
vassal state, the Greek free cities into Roman "allies"". 

After some vicissitudes and waverings during the first century 
B. C. and the first century A. IX, Rome achieved her aim and the 
Bosporan kingdom became for centuries her vassal. But this Bos- 
poran kingdom was no more the old state of the Spartocides. The 
neighborhood of the Sarniatians and Scythians and the rule of 
Mithridates had borne fruit. Bosporus and the other Greek cities 
were no longer purely Greek. 

I have already pointed out that Mithridates relied chiefly upon 
his Iranian allies and his half-Iranian subjects in the Founts. Tie 
filled up the Greek towns with them and assigned to them influential 
posts and large holdings of land. Seeing that the Greeks did not 
welcome his rule, he tried to bring into the Greek cities more trust- 
worthy elements- It is probable that he was the first who trans- 
ferred a large body of Jewish settlers to the Bosporan kingdom. 
Xo wonder that he left Bosporus with a large admixture of foreign 
intruders. His successors had to reckon with this state of things. 
They were themselves not Creek. The dynasty reigning over Bos 
porus during the first three centuries A. D. were descended from 
the union of Py nanus (daughter of Pharnaces, son of Mithridates, 
by one of his foreign wives) and a Sarniatian or Maeotian prince, 
Aspiirgus, son of Asandroclios. Aspurgiis himself married as his 
second wife a Thracian princess. Gepaepyrts. Thus the Bosporan 
dynasty evidently was not Greek at all, but half-Iranian, half- 
Thracian. And we must not forget that this dynasty ruled over a 
combination of a few Greek towns and many native tribes, and 
depended in its wars partly on city levies, but chiefly on hired or 

222 Mikhail Rostoi'tsci' 

conscript native soldiers. Under these conditions the Bosporan 
kingdom inevitably became more and more barbarian, i. e. r Iranian, 
as the native civilization was chiefly Iranian, although the native 
tribes were of varied origin — Iranians, Thracians, Caucasians. We 
wonder, not at the fact of this lranization, but rather at the amazing; 
phenomenon of the pertinacity of Greek language, Greek habits, and 
Greek thought among a population in whom Greek blood flowed 
more and more .scantily and among whom even Greek personal 
names became exceptional. It is remarkable that these barbarian 
citizens of the Bosporan towns boasted of their Hellenism and tried 
to convince everyone, against all evidence, by keeping alive Greek 
traditions, Greek education. Greek language, and by maintaining a 
kind of cult for Homer and Plato, that they were really descended 
from the Milesian and other Greek settlers on the shores of the 
Black Sea. 

This Hellenism, however, was but a pious camouflage. The citi- 
zens of the Bosporan towns in the second and third centuries A. D, 
were not in any respect different, except as regards the official lan- 
guage, from the Hellenized Scythians and Sarmatians, their neigh- 
bors. Students of social and economic life should pay more atten- 
tion than they have hitherto, to the economic and social conditions 
of the Bosporan kingdom at this period. These conditions did not 
change very much as compared with those of the Spartocid period. 
But they became more like the feudal organization of the Scythian 
kingdom and the several Sarirmtian tribal states. The study both 
of the sculptured funereal stelae, found by the hundred in K.ertch 
and recently published by Kicseritski and Watzinger, 20 and of the 
painted funereal chambers and vaults of Pauticapaeum. collected 
and investigated by myself, 21 as well as the study of the furniture of 
thousands of graves which have been opened in the Bosporan ne- 
cropolis, shows that the Bosporan kingdom was. like the Scythian 
and Sarmatian state, a kind of highly organized military community 
of landowners and traders, who ruled over a native population of 
serfs. Some of the neighboring tribes recognized the supremacy 
of the Bosporan kings and were their vassals, as they themselves 
were vassals of Rome ; some were their allies or their enemies. The 
great wealth of the ruling Bosporan aristocracy depended entirely 
on their exploitation of the rich soil of a part of the Crimea and the 
Taman peninsula and on their trade with the Greek and Roman 

20 G. von Kieseritski and C. Watzingcr, Griechische Grabrclicfs aits Sndruss- 
tattd (Etjrlin, i*twj\. 

2" M. Roslovtser, Ancient Dccoratix-e Painting in South Russia {Si. Peters- 
burg, 19*3); */■ Jour, of Hell. Studies. XXXIX, (i9'9> 144 *T- 

South Russia in Early +Jgcs 223 

world, i. c. on their command of the sen routes. This command, 
which was upheld at all costs by the suzerains of the Bosporus — the 
Romans — was the chief reason why the Sarmatians never thought 
of destroying or capturing the Greek cities. They perfectly under- 
stood that such destruction would mean a complete cessation of the 
importation of all manufactured goods, to which they had become 
more and more accustomed. 

I cannot deal at length in this short article with all the curious 
peculiarities of the social, religious, political, artistic, and intellectual 
life in the Bosporus during the first three centuries A. D, Broadly 
speaking, we meet everywhere the same phenomenon : a thin Greek 
shell and a hard native kernel. The coexistence of these is charac- 
teristic of the whole epoch and of many provinces within the Roman 
empire. But in no other case have we to deal with so enduring an 
organization, with such a fulness of historical evidence, and with 
such a combination of Greek and Iranian elements. T must empha- 
size that if we want to know anything about the social, political, and 
cultural structure of the greatest enemy of Rome — the Parthians — 
we must begin by a careful study of the Bosporus, and if we would 
understand the Sassanid renascence of the Iranian creative genius 
we must attentively watch the signs of a similar renascence — in art. 
religion, and political ideas — in the Bosporus in the second and third 
centuries A. F>. 

This renascence was diverted into a different channel by a strong 
advance towards the Black Sea on the part of German trihes from 
the north- — the Goths. But it was precisely this advance and the 
mixture of Gothic and Irano-Greek elements in South Russia which 
made this Iranian renascence in South Russia of not merely local 
but universal importance. The germs of Iranian culture — the 
strongest and most creative of the civilizations then existing in the 
ancient world, as the Graeeo-Roman was dying out — were not con- 
fined, as in the case of Sassanid Persia, within the boundaries oT one 
state. These germs were not brought to Europe by weak and inter- 
mittent currents of trade, but they were conveyed by conquering 
tribes into the whole of Europe. They there formed the civilization 
of Western Europe in general, for they were the foundation of the 
civilization of the ruling classes in Europe, of those Goths, Vandals. 
Sucves. and afterwards I Tuns, who were so closely connected with 
Sarmatians and who had no civilization of their own. 

For the development of Slavonic states in Russia and the Balkan 
Peninsula the history of the Bosporan kingdom, interwoven as it is 
with the history of the Scythians, Sarmatians, Goths, Scytho-Goths, 


224 Mikhail Rostovtsev 

and Sarmato Goths, has still greater significance. The Scandina- 
vians who organized the political life of the first Slavonic states 
known to history, in South Russia, followed a path already well 
defined by the Baste riiac, the Gotlis T and their followers. And in 
Russia they met with the same fate. Like the Goths, they adopted 
en bloc the higher civilization which they found firmly established 
on the banks of the Dnieper, and they inherited all the relations 
between the Dnieper basin and the South and the West which had 
been formed during centuries and centuries of friendly intercourse. 
We have only to study more closely than has been done the antiqui- 
ties of South Russia during the period of migration, i. e., from 
the fourth to the eighth century, to become aware of the uninter- 
rupted evolution of Iranian culture in South Russia through these 
centuries. If the Byzantine empire at this epoch appears more and 
more Iranized, that conies not only from its relations with Sassanid 
Persia, but chiefly from the Tranization of its immediate neighbors 
in the Balkan Peninsula, from the type of civilization which was 
brought to Constantinople by the so-called barbarian troops, and 
from the characteristics of the ruling aristocracy which consisted 
chiefly of the elements furnished by these barbarian troops. The 
Slavonic state of Kiev presents the same features, not because the 
Slavonic princes imitated the Byzantine emperors and adopted their 
art and habits, but because the same cultural tradition — 1 mean the 
Graeco-Iranian — was the only tradition which was known to South 
Russia for centuries and which no German or Mongolian invaders 
were able to destroy. 

JM. RoStovtsev. 










OCTOBER 1913 TO JULY 1914 






3/ inns .- Scythians and Greeks 843 

gat ions of geology (prehistoric archaeology) had shown that the great 
plain of Europe was from times immemorial the abode of man. In that 
plain no other than Indo-European speech was ever spoken; whereas 
the Indo-European languages in Asia are surrounded everywhere by 
allophyllic nations and languages. Indo-European in Asia obviously is 
(as in India or Armenia), or can easily be accounted for as, an over- 
crust. The n on- Indo-European nationality of Asia Minor offers par- 
ticularly good reason for assuming that these languages originated 
soinrzvhere in LLurapc* and not somewhere in Asia, provided we include 
the Scythian steppes in the name Europe. If the spread of the Indo- 
Europeans had been from Asia to Europe the omission of Asia Minor 
is hardly explainable; the contrary movement from Continental Europe 
through Scythia into the Aryan ( Indo-Iranian ) region must naturally 
have passed around the water- and mountain hedged peninsula of Asia 
Minor (see the maps) . At a later time, a sea- faring time. Asia Minor 
began to be settled sporadically from Hellas and Thrace ; then the 
Aegean Sea, Hellespont, Propontis, and Bosphorus, served as a bridge, 
rather than put apart, the two peninsulas of the Balkans and Asia Minor, 

Maurice Bloomfield. 

Scythians and Creeks: a Sitrz'cy of Ancient History and Archaeology 
on the North Coast of the Euxiite from the Danube to the Cau- 
casus. By Ellis H. Minns, M.A., Fellow of Pembroke Col- 
lege. (Cambridge: University Press. 19*3- Pp. xl, J2Q, with 

Nearly sixty years ago, Neumann published the first volume of his 
book Die Heltcnen im Stythenlande — and died. Mr Minns has been 
more fortunate; for, vputros di-^ptan-uw ruv.i^mE J^w, he has attempted 
a history of Scythia, and lived to publish the whole. Xow, having 
caught up these prodigious arrears (in essentials, if not in every de- 
tail), he will find it recreation to keep abreast of what the Russians 
write, and tell us at intervals what there is fresh to know. For this is 
a monumental book. The preliminary bibliography of Russian serial 
publications alone occupies four pages. As Mr. Minns says in his 
preface, he has attempted to begin at the beginning , so there is an ad- 
mirable sketch of the physical geography of the region in chapter I., 
and a full summary in chapter VII. of its " pre-Scythic " culture, little 
known as yet, but very remarkable in its late neolithic and early bronze- 
age phases, with finely decorated pottery, painted with spirals and leaf- 
like designs which suggest affinities with Cucuteni and other Rumanian 
sites, and more remotely with one phase of neolithic Thessaly. Russian 
archaeologists may well be excused for thinking, in a first enthusiasm, 
that they had here the origin of the curvilinear painted ceramic of the 
Aegean : but there does not seem to be any evidence of such a connection. 

But if this culture- is " pre-Scythian T \ who were the Scythians? 

§44 Reviews of Btoks 

The evidence, as usual, is twofold t ancient testimony, and the results of 
modern research. Chapters II.— VI. take the first group of sources 
separately, and present what has come down to us of Greek belief, in a 
scholarly and cautious way. Chapters III. and V., on Herodotus's 
account of (the country, and of adjacent regions, will naturally attract 
the attention of " classical " readers, who will value the references to 
the large Russian literature of this problem. Ethnologists will turn 
rather to chapter VI. on the migrations of peoples in or out of Scythia 
in historic times, both for the intrinsic interest of these, and for the 
light which they throw (by analogy) on the obscurer question of the 
origin and distribution of the Scythians, as known to the Greeks. This 
is one line of attack, the ethnological; it does not lead us very far; for 
our knowledge of the Scythian language is fragmentary, the subsequent 
intruders above mentioned have probably confused the qualities of the 
steppe-population beyond possibility of analysis, and (as Mr. Minns is 
care fut to point out) the osteologies! evidence of interments is of little 
value till we can determine the date and cultural phase of the particular 
" kurgans " which contain thorn : and as he sa}'s (p. 145), " kurgan " is 
just the Russian for "barrow", and there are barrows of all periods 
from " pre-Scythian ,f to the thirteenth century. There are also very 
important " burial-areas " which are not surmounted by a " kurgan ". 
Moreover, the measurements known to Mr. Minns lead to no very 
decisive result. He treats this matter, however, very briefly, and with 
less than his usual armament of references. He would add greatly to 
the debt which we owe him already, if he would some day publish, in 
collaboration with a professed anthropometer, a digest of all the works 
on South Russian types of man. A quite fresh line of attack on the 
ancient accounts of Scythian physiognomy and pathology is opened, by 
the way, in Mr. W. R* Halliday's recent article in the Annual of the 
British School at Athens on the folk-lore of the B^Xeia vm^ro^. What- 
ever their racial characteristics, there seems little doubt that the Scvtlu- 
ans of classical time represent in the main the result of a fairly recent 
period of ethnic disturbance, and that their culture has a quality of its 
own. The long chapter VIII., therefore, which deals with " Scythian "' 
tombs and their contents, is of central importance in this book. It is 
most carefully compiled, and richly illustrated — the reproductions of 
the Kul-Oba ivories are wonderful — and it will remain for long the 
standard place of reference for the known material, and a sure starting- 
point for subsequent reviews of discovery. To those who are not 
already acquainted with the finds, the wealth and variety and the really 
artistic quality of many of the objects will be amazing; and to any one 
who is interested in the workings of Hellenic culture on adjacent civili- 
zations and styles, most instructive, and full of perplexing suggestions. 
With this wealth of genuine material at his disposal, Mr. Minns can 
afford to be brief about modern prowess: of a famous recent con- 
troversy, he gives us the upshot neatly (p. 461) : " Saitaphernes would 

Afiuns .' Scylhians and Greeks 845 

have been much pleased with Rachumovski's work, had it been executed 
in time/" The weJI-known Vettersfelde find, on the other hand, falls 
here into its proper context; and there is a cautious note on the rudo 
stone figures known as " Kamennya Baby ", which are often found on 
Scythian tumuli, but are almost certainly of medieval workmanship. 

Less liable to disturbance than Scythia, and presenting clear analogies 
and similarities in its culture, the great Siberian province falls properly 
within the scope of a work of this kind, and is adequately but concisely 
treated in chapter IX. From a comparison between its data and the 
less foreign-looking objects in the tombs of Scythia itself, it is possible. 
with all reserve, to frame a notion of the characteristics of Scythian art 
(ch. X.) T and to distinguish the principal sources of non-Scythian influ- 
ence which modified its course; also to trace Scythian influence, and 
especially the trail of Scythian zoomorphic design, over a wide area of 
northern Asia, where it meets and blends grotesquely with the " Persian 
beast-style", a zoomorphic art of wholly different origin. 

At this point the book falls a little into two halves. It has traced 
the history and archaeology of Scythia down to the point where the 
arts of the Greek colonies along the Black Sea frontage had become the 
dominant influence, and purely Greek masterpieces like the Chcrtomlyk 
bow-case and the JKuI-Oba vase were being imported for the use of 
Scythian chiefs, and (what is more) were being made by artists familiar 
with Scythian life and manners, as the representations on these objects 
show. Now comes, in its proper place, the study of the Greek colonies 
themselves, which are the nurseries of the Scythian Hellenism, benefi- 
cent or disastrous according to the capacity and temperament of the 
individual Helleriized. The connecting link is the material culture of 
these cities; their political history and their topography are but the 
setting of the jewel, the Greek spirit which founded, and possessed them 
so long. And this material culture of the South Russian sites is of more 
than local importance. Nearly all that we know of Greek woodwork, 
textiles, and decorative painting, comes (in the accidents of archaeology) 
from these remote cities, which play so small a direct part in Greek 
history as we commonly read it. Even in departments of skilled handi- 
craft, such as jewelry, in which we have other sources, in Etruria and 
Cyprus, many of the finest examples, and many also of the best-dated, 
are won from Scythian soil. Sculpture, in a country so ill-provided 
with fine stone as most of Scythia is, naturally makes but a poor show, 
though the beautiful little head from Olbia which is figured on page 293 
shows that the taste for good work was not lacking. Painting, less 
dependent on natural accident for its execution, flourished splendidly, 
as the early stele of Apphe and the catacombs of Kertch attest, and 
passed on into reckless luxuriance in later examples. Some of the 
decorated vases and terra cotta figures may very well he local studies 
from the Greek designs which they reproduce. Many of these portable 
objects are, however, certainly from workshops in the Aegean or beyond: 

846 Reviews of JBooks 

Athens, Megara, or Alexandria. The rich series of glass work also 
seems to have been all imported, and on page 82 Mr. Minns says that 
all of it except the beads is probably Roman. Probably he is right; but 
on page 362 he refers to " the early kinds, as at Kurdzhips " ; meaning 
apparently the amphora which on page 224 he assigns to the last cen- 
tury B. C. In view of the great difficulty, which we experience at 
present, in filling the technological gap between the early Greek and the 
Graeco-Roman fabrics of variegated glass, it would be interesting to 
follow up these Scythian glass finds more in detail. Even in Kisa's 
otherwise tliorough treatise, Das Clas in Alter turn Cj this Scythian ma- 
terial receives less attention than it deserves. Bronzes are curiously 
rare, but are more frequently of local workmanship than we should 
expect in that event. In jewelry, the rather sudden and very copious 
use of colored stones, at and after Alexander's time, repeats, of course, 
a change which is familiar in other parts of the Greek world; but it 
would be an important contribution to our knowledge if it could be 
ascertained whether the stones are of the same quality and materials as 
elsewhere, or whether they betray another origin. The answer (which 
perhaps some Russian mineralogist or jeweler has already written out, 
for Mr, Minns to translate) has an obvious bearing on the question 
whether the gold work in which they are set was made in the Pontic 
colonies, or imported from Alexandria or some other of the great 
centres of this industry, Mr, Minns suggests that the principal sources 
of these colored stones were the "accumulations of the Persian realm 
in Iran and Nearer Asia"; did anything from this source come out at 
Pontic ports and not go round by the great Levantine emporia? 

The Greek tombs in which these treasures lay show a special series 
of constructive forms, and some local peculiarities of arrangement and 
furniture (ch. XII,). This chapter is short and Mr. Minns apologizes 
for his inability to press comparisons with other Hellenic types; but if 
there are deficiencies, they are certainly not on the side which alone he 
professes to cover, the presentation of the South Russian evidence in 
a form in which specialists can use it. 

The Greek cities to which these rich tombs belonged have left Fairly 
copious remains, and some of them have been carefully examined. There 
is, however, still room for extensive excavation on all the principal sites; 
and the chapters (XIV.— XIX.) on Tyras, Olbia, Cercinitis, Chersoncsus, 
Theodosia, Nymphaeum, and Bosporus necessarily record, for the most 
part, only what has been made out with some certainty by surface 
exploration, and (for political history) by the study of the coins and 
inscriptions. But the conclusion of the whole matter, for the lay reader 
at all events, is summed up rather in the section on Colonization and 
Trade {ch. XIII.), which has, by the way, a select bibliography of its 
own (p. 444)- Mr. Minns thinks that the Cimmerians of the Odyssey 
represent tales of the Cimmerian Bosporus, " a land weird enough 
with its mud- volcanoes and marshes to supply the groundwork for a 

A f inns .' Scythians and (Greeks 84 7 

picture of the Lower World"; and is tempted to bring- the Laestry- 
gonians into this region with them. But he does not fee] himself forced 
by this conclusion to bring down the date of this knowledge of the 
Scythian foreshore into Hellenic times, and in this be is probably well 
advised. There is, however, some need for caution against taking for 
more than they are worth either von Stern's comparisons of the painted 
vases (already noted) from South Russian tombs with the early Minoan 
pottery, or the recent stress laid by some German scholars on Greek 
place-names suggestive of a " Carian " sea-power in prehistoric times. 
" Carian '* theories are as old as Herodotus, and they die almost as 
hard in Germany as theories Pelasgian do among English scholars. Of 
very different value is Mr. Minus's own comparison (pp. 437—438) of the 
Gothic sea-raiders of the third century A. D. (and he might have added 
the Varangian Northmen, later still) who "took as kindly to sea- 
raiding" oti reaching the Black Sea from the interior of Europe, as he 
suggests that previous intruders may have done " in the Middle Ages of 
Greece H _ Certainly the ancient accounts of the range of " Cimmerian " 
raids suggest that these northern aggressors had sea-power. A phrase 
on the same page suggests that Mr. Minns shares the conclusion of 
Dr. Leaf and others as to the obstruction offered by the Trojan power 
to Aegean explorers of the North, On the Milesian colonization he has 
not much to say, perhaps because beyond the bare outlines there is not 
much to be said; but it is at the cost of undervaluing somewhat the 
factor of skill and experience in the selection of the greater sites. Until 
we know more clearly which of the early settlements failed, we have not 
perhaps the material for a decision. Much depends on the question, how 
soon the Siberian gold began to be transmitted westward, and how far 
■west it came. If, as seems not unlikely, such gold was traded into 
Balkan lands quite early (though Mr. Minns perhaps would not agree) 
it was not beyond the calculation of Milesian navigators that a sea-way 
which ran out so far to the north and up so far along the Scythian 
rivers might tap this gold-route, just as they (and the Argonauts before 
them) already knew that there was a "golden fleece" in Colchis. The 
discovery of a vase of geometric style on the island of Berezan in the 
neighborhood of Olbia suggests further that (as we should in any case 
expect) Greek explorers came, and Greek manufactures were traded, 
before the great rush of colonization in the seventh century: and this 
means time for a good deal to be found out about the hinterland as well 
as about the coast. Against Berthier de Lagarde's scepticism about 
the northern gold, we may set a bit of folk-lore which may be more than 
coincidence. Herodotus knows that the northern gold comes from far 
to the northeast of Scythta, and that it is guarded by fabulous griffins. 
Now the alluvial gold of Western Siberia is often found in gravels con- 
taining remains of rhinoceros and other large animals; and the horns of 
the rhinoceros are recognized by the native gold-diggers as the arma- 
ment of gigantic birds which formerly haunted the gold-fields. This is 
am. Hisr. mv., vol- xix. «— 55, 

848 Retnews of Books 

hardly a story "to attract enterprise", as Mr. Minns puts it (p. 44©)* 
unless shooting-rights went with the "claim". It looks now like a bit 
of real local myth, explanatory at first, and manipulated, if at all, with 
intent to deter Greek prospectors, not to allure them. Mr. Minns makes 
an interesting point, further on, when he notes the almost total lack 
of evidence for the use of furs among Greeks outside Pontus. If any- 
thing, to wear furs was distinctive of the barbarian: as in Euripides,. 
Cyclops, 1. 330. The protests of the austere against the luxury of fur- 
wearing hardly begin before the Christian Fathers, and belong to a time 
when fashions were set in Byzantium, where the winter is bitter, not 
in Miletus or Athens or even in Ephesus. 

As will be evident already, Mr, Minns has put scholars under a 
very great obligation of gratitude, for a book of wide learning, and 
sound judgment: and he is all the more to be congratulated on the 
completion of it, because none knows better than he that a task like 
this is pleasantly endless: it takes some courage to write "press" across 
the sheets and begin fair and square on your "Addenda". And we 
look for very copious Addenda from Mr. Minns. 

J, L, Myhes. 

Greek Imperialism. By William Scott Ferguson, Professor of 
Ancient History. Harvard University. (Boston and New York: 
Houghton Mifrlin Company. 1913. Pp. xiv, 258,) 
It has for several years been the opinion of the reviewer that Mr. 
Ferguson is to be ranked at the very forefront of English-writing 
scholars in the field of Greek history. His early studies in Greek 
chronology gave him immediate recognition, greater in Europe, perhaps, 
than in the United States because of the greater interest there in ancient 
history. The recognition so quickly attained has been justified by the 
number and quality of his scientific studies published in classical and 
historical journals of the United States, England, and Germany. By 
his excellent book on Hellenistic Athens, Mr. Ferguson established once 
for all his reputation as a scholar capable of a sustained constructive 
effort. Tn the present volume upon Greek imperialism, which consists 
of the Lowell Lectures delivered tn February of 1913, he appears in a 
new endeavor, and subjects himself thereby to criticism and evaluation 
from a new standpoint, that of his ability to address a lay audience and 
leave with it sharply defined impressions of the meaning and course of 
Greek imperialism. 

In seven chapters the author has presented the progress of Greek 
imperialism from the organization of the Peloponnesian League in the 
seventh century B. C. to the time when Greek political life became but a 
minor factor in the great composite of the Roman Kmpire. The first 
chapter is given over to the definition of the political terms and an 
explanation of the general situation involved in the remainder of the 
book, especially to the city-state and its ideals and the formation of